HUMAN SECURITY IN THEORY AND PRACTICE
Application of the Human Security Concept and the
United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security
Human Security Unit
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
United Nations
Executive Summary
Prepared as a guide for practitioners who wish to integrate the added value of the human security
approach into their work, this handbook provides an overview of the human security concept and
its operational impact. Useful tools for applying the human security concept, including a step-bystep strategy for developing, implementing and evaluating human security programme/projects are
provided. Two detailed case studies; one in post-conflict situations and another related to food
insecure scenarios, demonstrate the application of these human security tools and are followed
with additional examples of projects supported under the United Nations Trust Fund for Human
Security.
This handbook assumes prior knowledge in programme/project management methods, such as
Results Based Management (RBM) as well as logical framework analysis, and will be
accompanied by a series of trainings for UN agencies, field staff and other stakeholders.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 - The Concept of Human Security and its Added Value
1.1 The Concept of Human Security as defined by the Commission on Human Security
1.2
1.3
6
Why Human Security Now?
6
What is Human Security?
6
What are the main features of Human Security?
7
What do Protection and Empowerment mean for achieving Human Security?
8
How does Human Security differ from Traditional Security, Human Development
and Human Rights Approaches?
9
The Added Value of Human Security as an Operational Tool
9
Chapter 2 - How to Operationalise the Human Security Concept
2.1
Human Security Principles and Approach
12
2.2
Human Security Programme Phases
13
Phase I: Analysis, Mapping and Planning
The Human Security Analytical Framework to Needs/Vulnerability
and Capacity Analysis
14
Human Security Strategies
15
The Human Security Multi-Sectorality and Externalities Framework
17
The Human Security “Protection and Empowerment” Framework
18
Phase II: Implementation
19
Participatory Approaches and Local Capacity Building
19
The Stages of Participatory Implementation
20
Phase III: Impact Assessment
The Six Phases of an Human Security Impact Assessment (HSIA)
2.3
13
Lessons Learnt, Best Practices, and Mainstreaming of Human Security
22
22
25
Chapter 3 - Human Security Case Studies
3.1
Human Security in Post-Conflict Situations
I.
Overview of Post-Conflict Scenarios: Characteristics, Gaps and Challenges
27
27
II. Human Security Principles and Approach in Post-Conflict Situations
30
III. Human Security Programme Phases in Post-Conflict Situations
31
3
3.2
Human Security in Situations of Food Insecurity
I.
41
Overview of Situations of Food Insecurity: Context, Gaps and Challenges
41
II. Human Security Principles and Approach in Situations of Food Insecurity
44
III. Human Security Programme Phases in Situations of Food Insecurity
46
Annex 1 - Genesis and the Institutional Trajectory of Human Security within the UN
Framework
55
Annex 2 - Sample of Projects funded by the UNTFHS
59
Bibliography
75
4
List of Acronyms
ABHS
ASEAN
CFA
CHS
DDC
DRC
FAO
HDI
HLTF
HSIA
HSN
HSU
ICC
IDP
ILO
IMF
IOM
FHS
FMLN
LAS
MDG
MONUC
NGO
NRS
OAS
OCHA
OHCHR
OSCE
PAHO
PRSP
RFTF
SAP
UN
UNDP
UNFPA
UNHCR
UNICEF
UNIFEM
UNODC
UNTFHS
UNV
WFP
WHO
WTO
Advisory Board on Human Security
Association of South East Asian Nations
Comprehensive Framework for Action
Commission on Human Security
District Development Committees
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Food and Agriculture Organization
Human Development Index
High Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis
Human Security Impact Analysis
Human Security Network
Human Security Unit
International Criminal Court
Internally Displaced Persons
International Labor Organization
International Monetary Fund
International Organization for Migration
Friends of Human Security
Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front
League of Arab States
Millennium Development Goals
United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
Non-Governmental Organization
National Referral System
Organization of American States
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Pan-American Health Organization
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
Results Focused Transitional Framework
Structural Adjustment Programme
United Nations
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Population Fund
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
United Nations Children’s Fund
United Nations Development Fund for Women
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security
United Nations Volunteers
World Food Programme
World Health Organization
World Trade Organization
5
Chapter 1 - The Concept of Human Security and its Added Value1
1.1 The Concept of Human Security as defined by the Commission on Human
Security
Why Human Security Now?
As argued by the Commission on Human Security2 (CHS), the need for a new paradigm of
security is associated with two sets of dynamics:

First, human security is needed in response to the complexity and the interrelatedness of both
old and new security threats – from chronic and persistent poverty to ethnic violence, human
trafficking, climate change, health pandemics, international terrorism, and sudden economic
and financial downturns. Such threats tend to acquire transnational dimensions and move
beyond traditional notions of security that focus on external military aggressions alone.

Second, human security is required as a comprehensive approach that utilizes the wide range of
new opportunities to tackle such threats in an integrated manner. Human security threats
cannot be tackled through conventional mechanisms alone. Instead, they require a new
consensus that acknowledges the linkages and the interdependencies between development,
human rights and national security.
What is Human Security?
The CHS, in its final report Human Security Now, defines human security as:
“…to protect the vital core of all human lives in ways that enhance human
freedoms and human fulfillment. Human security means protecting fundamental
freedoms – freedoms that are the essence of life. It means protecting people from
critical (severe) and pervasive (widespread) threats and situations. It means using
processes that build on people’s strengths and aspirations. It means creating political,
social, environmental, economic, military and cultural systems that together give
people the building blocks of survival, livelihood and dignity.” (CHS: 2003: 4)
Overall, the definition proposed by the CHS re-conceptualizes security in a fundamental way by:
(i) moving away from traditional, state-centric conceptions of security that focused primarily
on the safety of states from military aggression, to one that concentrates on the security
of the individuals, their protection and empowerment;
1
This handbook has been developed by the HSU-OCHA under the guidance of Dr. Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh, Sciences
Po, and in close collaboration with Ms. Hitomi Kubo, Sciences Po, and Ms. Elianna Konialis.
2
The Commission on Human Security was established in January 2001 in response to the UN Secretary-General’s call
at the 2000 Millennium Summit for a world “free from want” and “free from fear.” The Commission consisted of
twelve prominent international figures, including Mrs. Sadako Ogata (former UN High Commissioner for Refugees)
and Professor Amartya Sen (1998 Nobel Economics Prize Laureate).
6
(ii) drawing attention to a multitude of threats that cut across different aspects of human life
and thus highlighting the interface between security, development and human rights; and
(iii) promoting a new integrated, coordinated and people-centered approach to advancing
peace, security and development within and across nations.
What are the main features of Human Security?
Human security brings together the ‘human elements’ of security, rights and development. As
such, it is an inter-disciplinary concept that displays the following characteristics:





people-centered
multi-sectoral
comprehensive
context-specific
prevention-oriented
As a people-centered concept, human security places the individual at the ‘centre of analysis.’
Consequently, it considers a broad range of conditions which threaten survival, livelihood and
dignity, and identifies the threshold below which human life is intolerably threatened.
Human security is also based on a multi-sectoral understanding of insecurities. Therefore, human
security entails a broadened understanding of threats and includes causes of insecurity relating for
instance to economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political security.
Table I: Possible Types of Human Security Threats 3
Type of Security
Examples of Main Threats
Economic security
Food security
Health security
Persistent poverty, unemployment
Hunger, famine
Deadly infectious diseases, unsafe food, malnutrition, lack of
access to basic health care
Environmental degradation, resource depletion, natural
disasters, pollution
Physical violence, crime, terrorism, domestic violence, child
labor
Inter-ethnic, religious and other identity based tensions
Political repression, human rights abuses
Environmental security
Personal security
Community security
Political security
Moreover, human security emphasizes the interconnectedness of both threats and responses when
addressing these insecurities. That is, threats to human security are mutually reinforcing and interconnected in two ways. First, they are interlinked in a domino effect in the sense that each threat
feeds on the other. For example, violent conflicts can lead to deprivation and poverty which in turn
could lead to resource depletion, infectious diseases, education deficits, etc. Second, threats within
3
Based on the UNDP Human Development Report of 1994 and the HSU-OCHA.
7
a given country or area can spread into a wider region and have negative externalities for regional
and international security.
This interdependence has important implications for policy-making as it implies that human
insecurities cannot be tackled in isolation through fragmented stand-alone responses. Instead,
human security involves comprehensive approaches that stress the need for cooperative and multisectoral responses that bring together the agendas of those dealing with security, development and
human rights. “With human security [as] the objective, there must be a stronger and more
integrated response from communities and states around the globe” (CHS: 2003: 2).
In addition, as a context-specific concept, human security acknowledges that insecurities vary
considerably across different settings and as such advances contextualized solutions that are
responsive to the particular situations they seek to address. Finally, in addressing risks and root
causes of insecurities, human security is prevention-oriented and introduces a dual focus on
protection and empowerment.
What do Protection and Empowerment mean for achieving Human Security?
Protection and empowerment of people are the two building blocks for achieving the goal of
human security. They are proposed by the CHS as the bi-parts of any human security policy
framework.

Protection is defined by the CHS as “strategies, set up by states, international agencies, NGOs
and the private sector, [to] shield people from menaces” (CHS: 2003:10). It refers to the norms,
processes and institutions required to protect people from critical and pervasive threats.
Protection implies a "top-down" approach. It recognises that people face threats that are
beyond their control (e.g., natural disasters, financial crises and conflicts). Human security
therefore requires protecting people in a systematic, comprehensive and preventative way.
States have the primary responsibility to implement such a protective structure. However,
international and regional organizations; civil society and non-governmental actors; and the
private sector also play a pivotal role in shielding people from menaces.

Empowerment is defined by the CHS as “strategies [that] enable people to develop their
resilience to difficult situations” (CHS: 2003:10).
Empowerment implies a “bottom up” approach. It aims at developing the capabilities of
individuals and communities to make informed choices and to act on their own behalf.
Empowering people not only enables them to develop their full potential but it also allows
them to find ways and to participate in solutions to ensure human security for themselves and
others.
As clearly stated by the CHS, protection and empowerment are mutually reinforcing and cannot
be treated in isolation: “both are required in nearly all situations of human insecurity, though their
form and balance will vary tremendously across circumstances” (CHS: 2003:10).
8
1.2 How does Human Security differ from Traditional Security, Human
Development and Human Rights Approaches?
“Human Security complements state security, strengthens human development and enhances
human rights” (CHS: 2003: 2). Yet the question often arises as to what are the substantive
differences between these concepts. Significant among these are the following:

Whereas state security concentrates on threats directed against the state, mainly in the form of
military attacks, human security draws attention to a wide scope of threats faced by individuals
and communities. It focuses on root causes of insecurities and advances people-centered
solutions that are locally driven, comprehensive and sustainable. As such, it involves a broader
range of actors: e.g. local communities, international organizations, civil society as well as the
state itself. Human security, however, is not intended to displace state security. Instead, their
relationship is complementary: “human security and state security are mutually reinforcing and
dependent on each other. Without human security, state security cannot be attained and vice
versa” (CHS: 2003: 6).

To human development’s objective of ‘growth with equity’, human security adds the important
dimension of ‘downturn with security’. Human security acknowledges that as a result of
downturns such as conflicts, economic and financial crises, ill health, and natural disasters,
people are faced with sudden insecurities and deprivations. These not only undo years of
development but also generate conditions within which grievances can lead to growing
tensions. Therefore, in addition to its emphasis on human well-being, human security is driven
by values relating to security, stability and sustainability of development gains.

Lastly, too often gross violations of human rights result in conflicts, displacement, and human
suffering on a massive scale. In this regard, human security underscores the universality and
primacy of a set of rights and freedoms that are fundamental for human life. Human security
makes no distinction between different kinds of human rights – civil, political, economic,
social and cultural rights thereby addressing violations and threats in a multidimensional and
comprehensive way. It introduces a practical framework for identifying the specific rights that
are at stake in a particular situation of insecurity and for considering the institutional and
governance arrangements that are needed to exercise and sustain them.
1.3 The Added Value of Human Security as an Operational Tool
Human security is increasingly being adopted as a doctrine to guide foreign policies and
international development assistance, as well as a policy tool for programming in the fields of
security, development and humanitarian work.
The strength and appeal of human security as an operational tool for analysis, explanation and
programming lies in the following components:
(i) A Framework for Protection and Empowerment
Human security derives much of its strength from its dual policy framework resting upon the two
9
mutually reinforcing pillars of protection and empowerment (as defined under section 1.1 above).
Operationalization of this framework introduces a hybrid approach which:






Combines top-down norms, processes and institutions, including the establishment of the rule
of law, good governance, accountability and social protective instruments with a bottom-up
focus in which democratic processes support the important role of individuals and
communities as actors in defining and implementing their essential freedoms.
Helps identify gaps in the existing security infrastructure and detects ways to mitigate the
impact of existing security deficits.
Ensures the sustainability of programmes and policies as protection and empowerment are
introduced in a systematic and preventative manner with a look to long-term stability.
Reinforces peoples’ ability to act on their own behalf.
Strengthens the resilience of individuals and communities to conditions of insecurity.
Encourages participatory processes.
(ii) Comprehensive
Human security addresses the full scope of human insecurities. It recognises the multi-dimensional
character of security threats – including but not limited to violent conflict and extreme
impoverishment – as well as their interdependencies (both sectorally and geographically). In
particular, as an operational approach, human security:





Attributes equal importance to civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.
Sets rudimentary thresholds below which no person’s livelihood, survival and dignity should
be threatened.
Provides a practical framework for the identification of a wide range threats in given crisis
situations.
Addresses threats both within and across borders.
Encourages regional and multilateral cooperation.
(iii) Multi-sectoral
Coherence is needed between different interventions in order to avoid negative harms while
choosing multiplying effects of positive interventions. To this end, human security develops a true
multi-sectoral agenda which:





Captures the ultimate impact of development or relief interventions on human welfare and
dignity.
Provides a practical framework for assessing positive and negative externalities of
interventions supported through policies, programmes and projects.
Enables comprehensive and integrated solutions from the fields of human rights, development
and security in a joint manner.
Helps to ensure policy coherence and coordination across traditionally separate fields and
doctrines.
Allows for knowledge-sharing and results-oriented learning.
10
(iv) Contextualization
Insecurities vary significantly across countries and communities. Both their causes and expressions
depend on a complex interaction of international, regional, national and local factors. Addressing
peoples’ insecurities therefore always requires specification to capture variations over time and
contexts. As a universally applicable, broad and flexible approach, human security provides a
dynamic framework that:







Addresses different kinds of insecurity as these manifest themselves in specific contexts.
Builds on processes that are based on peoples’ own perceptions of fear and vulnerability.
Identifies the concrete needs of populations under stress.
Enables the development of more appropriate solutions that are embedded in local realities.
Unveils mismatches between domestic and/or international policies and helps identify priority
security needs at the local level.
Looks at the impact of global developments on different communities.
Captures the rapidly changing international, regional and domestic security environments.
(v) Emphasis on Prevention
A distinctive element of human security is its focus on early prevention to minimize the impacts of
insecurity, to engender long-term solutions, and to build human capacities for undertaking
prevention. In this regard, human security:



Addresses root causes of human insecurities.
Emphasises early prevention rather than late intervention – thereby, more cost-effective.
Encourages strategies concerned with the development of mechanisms for prevention, the
mitigation of harmful effects when downturns occur and, ultimately, with helping victims to
cope.
(vi) Partnerships and Collaboration
With its emphasis on the interconnectedness of threats, human security requires the development
of an interconnected network of diverse stakeholders, drawing from the expertise and resources
of a wide range of actors from across the UN as well as the private and public sectors at the local,
national, regional and international levels. Human security can therefore lead to the establishment
of synergies and partnerships that capitalise on the comparative advantages of each implementing
organization and help empower individuals and communities to act on their own behalf.
(vii) Benchmarking, Evaluation and Impact Assessment
Analyses based on human security can be of widespread importance. By providing a holistic and
contextual account of peoples’ concrete needs and the factors endangering their security, the
information obtained through such analyses can be used in assessing existing institutional
arrangements and policies as well as a benchmark for impact evaluation.
11
Chapter 2 - How to Operationalise the Human Security Concept
2.1 Human Security Principles and Approach
From an operational perspective, human security aims to address complex situations of insecurity
through collaborative, responsive and sustainable measures that are (i) people-centered, (ii) multisectoral, (iii) comprehensive, (iv) context-specific, and (v) prevention-oriented. In addition, human
security employs a hybrid approach that brings together these elements through a protection and
empowerment framework.
Subsequently each human security principle informs the human security approach and must be
integrated into the design of a human security programme4.
HS Principle
People-centered
Multi-sectoral
Comprehensive
Context-specific
Prevention-oriented
HS Approach
 Inclusive and participatory.
 Considers individuals and communities in defining their
needs/vulnerabilities and in acting as active agents of change.
 Collectively determines which insecurities to address and identifies
the available resources including local assets and indigenous coping
mechanisms.
 Addresses multi-sectorality by promoting dialogue among key
actors from different sectors/fields.
 Helps to ensure coherence and coordination across traditionally
separate sectors/fields.
 Assesses positive and negative externalities of each response on the
overall human security situation of the affected community(ies).
 Holistic analysis: the seven security components of human security.
 Addresses the wide spectrum of threats, vulnerabilities and
capacities.
 Analysis of actors and sectors not previously considered relevant to
the success of a policy/programmme/project.
 Develop multi-sectoral/multi-actor responses.
 Requires in-depth analysis of the targeted situation.
 Focuses on a core set of freedoms and rights under threat in a given
situation.
 Identifies the concrete needs of the affected community(ies) and
enables the development of more appropriate solutions that are
embedded in local realities, capacities and coping mechanisms.
 Takes into account local, national, regional and global dimensions
and their impact on the targeted situation.
 Identifies risks, threats and hazards, and addresses their root causes.
 Focuses on preventative responses through a protection and
empowerment framework.
4
While this handbook is focused on human security programme development, nevertheless, the same principles and
approach can also be applied to human security project development and where appropriate to human security policies.
12
2.2 Human Security Programme Phases
To design a human security programme, the following phases must be considered. Each phase
requires a set of goals and tasks which provide the actions needed to ensure the integrity of the
human security programme.
Phase



Phase 1: Analysis, 

Mapping and
Planning



Phase 2:
Implementation




Phase 3: Impact
Assessment


Goals and tasks
Establish participatory processes and collectively identify the
needs/vulnerabilities and the capacities of the affected community(ies).
Map insecurities based on actual vulnerabilities and capacities with less
focus on what is feasible and more emphasis on what is actually
needed.
Establish priorities through needs/vulnerabilities and capacity analysis
in consultation with the affected community(ies).
Identify the root causes of insecurities and their inter-linkages.
Cluster insecurities based on comprehensive and multi-sectoral
mapping and be vigilant of externalities.
Establish strategies/responses that incorporate empowerment and
protection measures.
Outline short, medium, and long-term strategies/outcomes even if they
will not be implemented in the particular programme. (Outlining
strategies at different stages with the community is an important
foundation for sustainability.)
Establish multi-actor planning to ensure coherence on goals and the
allocation of responsibilities and tasks.
Implementation in collaboration with local partners.
Capacity building of the affected community(ies) and local institutions.
Monitoring as part of the programme and the basis for learning and
adaptation.
Are we doing the right thing as opposed to whether or not we are doing
things right?
Does the programme alleviate identified human insecurities while at the
same time avoiding negative externalities?
Deriving lessons learned from failures and successes and improving the
programme.
Phase 1: Analysis, Mapping and Planning
During the initial analysis, mapping and planning phase of a human security programme, it is
critically important to ensure that the programme addresses the actual needs/vulnerabilities and
capacities of the affected community(ies) and presents strategies that are based on the protection
and empowerment framework with the active participation and implementation of the affected
community(ies). Specifically, the goals of the analysis, mapping and planning phase are to:
13
(i)
collectively identify the needs/vulnerabilities and the capacities of the affected
community(ies) and develop programme priorities in consultation with the affected
community(ies);
(ii) identify the root causes of insecurities and their inter-linkages across sectors, and
establish comprehensive responses that generate positive externalities for the affected
community(ies).
(iii) ensure coherence on the goals and the allocation of responsibilities among the various
actors; and
(iv) include short, medium, and long-term strategies.
A. The Human Security Analytical Framework to Needs/Vulnerabilities and Capacity Analysis
A human security analytical framework to needs/vulnerabilities and capacity analysis is necessary
to guide the development and the implementation of the data collection process as well as to
inform the analysis of the data from a human security perspective. Specifically, the human security
approach to needs/vulnerabilities and capacity analysis will be determined by the following actions
under each of the human security principles:
 People-centered




Involve the affected community(ies) when gathering data on the needs/
vulnerabilities and the capacities of the affected community(ies).
Identify root causes through analysis of the ‘degree of cause’.
Develop empowerment strategies based on the capacities needed.
Strengthen the resilience of individuals and communities.
 Multi-sectoral/Comprehensive



Consider the broad range of threats and vulnerabilities both within and across
communities (including local, national, regional and international factors).
Develop a comprehensive and integrated analysis that incorporates the fields of
security, development and human rights.
Identify the lack of policy coherence and coordination across sectors/fields that can
have a negative impact on achieving the human security needs of the affected
community(ies).
 Context-specific




Ensure that analysis incorporates context specific local information.
Include community perception of the threats and vulnerabilities in addition to other
quantitative indicators.
Highlight potential mismatch between domestic and/or international policies and
the priority security needs of the affected community(ies).
Identify gaps in the existing security infrastructure.
 Prevention-oriented

Identify the root causes and the primary protection and empowerment gaps so as to
develop sustainable solutions.
14


Emphasize prevention as well as response when developing priorities.
Focus on empowerment measures that build on local capacities and resilience.
Once the data has been gathered, the Human Security Needs, Vulnerabilities and Capacity
Matrix (Table I) provides the spatial presentation for mapping, identifying and analyzing the
identified threats, needs and capacities of the affected community(ies). Mapping is well-suited to
the analytical needs of the human security approach. Not only does it manage complexity well,
mapping also provides the opportunity to visually:
(i) identify and link the most severe and widespread threats and vulnerabilities;
(ii) offer the strategies for addressing the identified insecurities; and
(iii) consider the capacities and the resources of the affected community(ies).
The spatial representation of mapping is also crucial for identifying differences within and among
communities in resource distribution. Finally, by providing a more comprehensive view of
insecurities in a particular situation or community(ies), mapping allows for stronger identification
of the gaps in the existing protection and empowerment infrastructures as well as the priorities for
action among the identified insecurities.
Table I - Human Security Needs, Vulnerabilities and Capacity Matrix
Needs/Vulnerabilities
National
Threats
Gender
Age
District
Socioeconomic
Status
Gender
Age
Local
Socioeconomic
Status
Gender
Age
Socioeconomic
Status
Capacities
Economic
Food
Health
Environmental
Personal
Community
Political
Based on the mapping exercise, the inter-linkages and dynamics among the various threats,
vulnerabilities and capacities are identified. It is in these intersections that the most effective
and comprehensive strategies can be developed. Therefore, it is important to identify these
intersections in order to:
1) Establish priorities (communities, areas of intervention, etc.) for action;
2) Assess the sectors and strategies for externalities; and
3) Develop multi-actor integrated plans.
B. Human Security Strategies
The human security approach not only requires a thorough assessment of the vulnerabilities and
15
the capacities of the affected community(ies), it also demands an assessment of the strategies
needed to help prevent and mitigate the recurrence of insecurities. It is through this dual
assessment that the interconnectedness between threats, vulnerabilities, capacities and strategies
can be most effectively examined.
Table II - Examples of Strategies and Capacities Needed for Addressing Human Insecurities
Human security
components
Economic security
Food security
Health security
Environmental
security
Personal security
Community security
Political security
Strategies to enhance protection and
empowerment
 Assured access to basic income
 Public and private sector employment,
wage employment, self-employment
 When necessary, government financed
social safety nets
 Diversify agriculture and economy
 Entitlement to food, by growing it
themselves, having the ability to
purchase it or through a public food
distribution system
 Access to basic health care and health
services
 Risk-sharing arrangements that pool
membership funds and promote
community-based insurance schemes
 Interconnected surveillance systems to
identify disease outbreaks at all levels
 Sustainable practices that take into
account natural resource and
environmental degradation
(deforestation, desertification)
 Early warning and response
mechanisms for natural hazards and/or
man-made disasters at all levels
 Rule of law
 Explicit and enforced protection of
human rights and civil liberties
 Explicit and enforced protection of
ethnic groups and community identity
 Protection from oppressive traditional
practices, harsh treatment towards
women, or discrimination again
ethnic/indigenous/refugee groups
 Protection of human rights
 Protection from military dictatorships
and abuse
 Protection from political or state
repression, torture, ill treatment,
unlawful detention and imprisonment
Capacities needed





Economic capital
Human capital
Public finance
Financial reserves
Diversified agriculture and economy
 Diversified agriculture and economy
 Local and national distribution
systems
 Universal basic education and
knowledge on health related matters
 Indigenous/traditional health practices
 Access to information and
community-based knowledge creation
 Natural resource capital
 Natural barriers to storm action (e.g.
coral reefs)
 Natural environmental recovery
processes (e.g. forests recovering from
fires)
 Biodiversity
 Indigenous/traditional practices that
respect the environment
 Coping mechanisms
 Adaptive strategies
 Memory of past disasters
 Social capital
 Coping mechanisms
 Adaptive strategies
 Memory of past disasters
 Local non-governmental organizations
or traditional organisms
 Good governance
 Ethical standards
 Local leadership
 Accountability mechanisms
16
C. The Human Security Multi-Sectorality and Externalities Framework
To develop effective human security strategies, the Human Security Multi-Sectorality and
Externalities Framework provides the necessary tool for developing policy and programme
coherence among the relevant sectors involved in a programme intervention. By assessing the
potential externalities of the proposed intervention, the framework entails multiple key functions in
the design and improvement of human security programmes.
Why undertake an analysis of multi-sectorality?
 Intervention in one area can have negative impacts in other areas of equal importance to
human security.
 Coherence is needed between different interventions in order to avoid negative externalities.
 To multiply positive externalities.
 To take advantage of available expertise, lessons learnt, etc.
 To share knowledge and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of responses.
 To be more efficient in terms of pooling of resources.
 To provide information for monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment.
What are the challenges of employing multi-sectorality?





Turf war between organizations.
Grand strategies that are top down, political and on paper.
Forced mainstreaming without explaining rationale.
Multiplication of overlays of management, accountability, committees, etc.
Different financing modalities as well as monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment.
Table III- An Example of a Human Security Externalities Framework
Human Security
Components
Economic
security
Food security
Health Security
Possible interventions and
Possible externalities on other insecurity domains
assistance in a human
security field by international Positive outcomes in other
Negative potential outcomes
donors
fields
E.g. Micro credit programmes Increase food production
Competition among receiving and
meant for economic security.
(food security). Communities non receiving communities
saved from economic
creates conflict (community
hardship less bent on fighting insecurity). Women targeted for
(political security), etc.
their increased income/power
(personal insecurity).
E.g. Relief aid meant for
Can increase economic
State is no longer accountable to
increasing food security for
security for communities
the population but to foreign
communities.
who sell their ration
authorities (political insecurity as
(economic security). Less
a result of illegitimacy). Aid is
rationale for conflict
looted (personal insecurity). Aid
(political security), etc.
decreases agriculture production
(economic insecurity of farmers).
Replacement of the state’s
E.g. (Re)building the health
Balance (re)attained in
care system.
mortality/fertility rates
responsibility in providing
(community and personal
healthcare (lack of trust in
security). Jobs created
institutions, political insecurity).
(economic security), etc.
Sanitation not taken into account
17
Environmental
Security
E.g. Installing environmental
sound management practices.
Personal
Security
E.g. Law and order
interventions, increased police
programmes and training
(personal security).
Community
Security
E.g. Promoting disarmament
and demobilization.
Political Security E.g. Support to transition to
democratic practices.
Recovering wasted and
polluted renewable resources
(economic security).
Increased production in
agriculture (food security),
etc.
Freedom from fear, want and
indignity (with impacts on all
human security concerns).
Jobs created (economic
security), etc.
Social harmony (leading to
the security of all
components). Jobs
(economic security), etc.
Reduction of political
exclusion (community
security). Participation of
communities (community
and personal security), etc.
(environmental insecurity).
Ignoring agricultural traditions
(linked to community insecurity).
Replacing the state (linked to
political insecurity). Abuse of
power by security forces
(personal and community
insecurity).
Exacerbating or creating new
tensions between communities.
Imposing particular type of
governance system (linked to
potential community, economic
and political insecurities).
(Adapted from S. Tadjbakhsh and A. Chenoy, Human Security: Concepts and Implications, London: Routledge, 2007)
How can policy and programme coherence be addressed?
For the most part, most organizations and institutions are attempting to address multi-sectorality
through coordination and a focus on effectiveness. This however is quite difficult in the face of
differing mandates. Therefore, rather than organizational coordination, a human security approach
requires working in an integrated manner by directly assessing externalities and focusing on
legitimacy, efficiency and effectiveness. A successful multi-sectoral approach requires:





An analytical, comprehensive, and integrated framework.
A strategic approach to change.
Permanent networking among programmes that have thematic or target population overlaps.
Overcoming tensions between short, medium, and long-term strategies and planning.
Joint interdisciplinary research.
D. The Human Security “Protection and Empowerment” Framework
The analysis, mapping and planning phase of a human security programme also requires
employing the “protection and empowerment” framework by designing strategies that address
both top-down and bottom-up measures.
 Protection involves strategies that enhance the capacities of the institutional/governance
structures needed to protect the affected community(ies) against the identified threats.
 Empowerment includes strategies that build upon the capacities of the affected
community(ies) to cope with the identified threats and to strengthen their resilience and
choices so as to act on their own behalf and those of the others.
18
How to develop ‘protection and empowerment’ strategies?
Having identified several strategies and assessed the potential positive and negative externalities
among each, it is crucial to subsequently assess the identified strategies for their employment of
the ‘protection and empowerment’ framework. The key questions at this stage are:
 What are the relationships between the specific protection and empowerment strategies?
 Which empowerment strategies build upon the capacities of the local population to best
resist and respond to the identified threats and vulnerabilities while also enlarging their
choices?


What community capacity(ies) and assets provide solid foundations for
empowerment strategies?
What community strengths have been neglected? How can they best be employed?
 Which protection strategies target the existing gaps in the human security infrastructure and
reinforce the capacities of the institutional structure to ensure the protection of the affected
community(ies) against the most severe and widespread threats?

Based on the assessment of resources and gaps in the human security infrastructure,
which strategies are most likely to have positive externalities on other sectors?
 Which protection strategies have the greatest positive externalities on empowerment?
Which empowerment strategies have the greatest positive externalities on protection
strategies?
Phase II. Implementation
One of the goals of the implementation phase is to ensure ownership by the beneficiaries and
local counterparts through capacity building and partnership. A strong human security programme
should be evaluated against the level of local ownership in the implementation phase and the
sustainability of the programme, which is increased through collaborative implementation.
A. Participatory Approaches and Local Capacity Building
Participation by the affected beneficiaries and local counterparts is vital to the successful
implementation and sustainability of any human security programme. Human security programmes
must be informed by inputs from the local population in order to be both legitimate and effective
in achieving the objectives of the affected community(ies). Participatory processes also provide
forums for partnerships that are necessary for addressing complex situations of human insecurity.
Today, there is a large toolkit of participatory approaches available and the decision on which to
employ (and to what degree) should be determined by the specificities of the circumstances.
Nevertheless, some of the factors that will impact strategic choices regarding participation include:
 Access to the local population.
 External hazards or hostile conditions.
19
 Timeframe.
 Funding constraints.
 Cultural/community barriers to participation.
 Existing inequalities amongst the local population.
Furthermore, within the context of this handbook, participatory approaches are applied to different
actors as well as various phases. For UN actors, participation is an important element for
advancing multi-agency programme and/or project development. As a result, participatory
processes are undertaken with multiple partner agencies in order to ensure:
 Shared goals, objectives, strategies, outcomes, and impact in programme/project
development.
 Clear delineation of responsibilities and tasks.
 Harmonized monitoring and reporting mechanisms.
Meanwhile for multi-actor groups, participation broadens the scope of the potential participants
and emphasizes local and national participatory processes as much as possible. In these groups,
participation:
 Provides a foundation for capacity-building and empowerment strategies.
 Supports implementation by local actors in collaboration with other agencies.
 Provides opportunities for building and/or strengthening networks of action.
 Provides a medium for mainstreaming best practices and lessons learned.
B. The Stages of Participatory Implementation
The building of local capacities and the emphasis on empowerment measures are
fundamental to the advancement of human security. This can occur during all phases of a human
security programme. However, the implementation phase provides significant opportunities for
building upon and developing new local capacities through participation in project activities and
implementation by community members and local counterparts. Participation subsequently needs
to be actively mainstreamed through:
 Careful planning that integrates strategies and activities which highlight and build upon the
capacities and the resources of the affected community(ies).
 Implementing, reporting and monitoring mechanisms in a manner that makes technical
assistance readily accessible and shares ownership for successful implementation with the
affected community(ies).
 Allowing for leadership to emerge from the affected community(ies) and building upon and
supporting legitimate local and community-based structures.
Stage 1: Present the programme design to the affected community(ies)
20
Although many local participants will have already been engaged in the programme planning
phase, however it is important to inform the wider affected community(ies) about the human
security programme you will be undertaking. In doing this:
 Allow for feedback from the affected community(ies) about the programme design and the
process of implementation;
 Be aware of the capacity of the local population to participate, while considering the local
context and the risks involved in their participation; and
 If the affected community(ies) did not participate in the programme design, engage them
in dialogue on how the process was conducted and seek their participation.
Stage 2: Establish a committee for overseeing the implementation
As participatory processes can be complex to manage, it is useful to establish a committee for
overseeing the implementation of the programme. Committees need to be representative and multiactor. When forming these committees, be sure to:
 Support legitimate leadership from the affected community(ies);
 Be clear about the mandate of the oversight committees and the lines of reporting.
Stage 3: Allocate tasks and responsibilities
Conflict or tension may arise in this stage of the implementation as various responsibilities also
carry different advantages and disadvantages. To avoid compromising the programme through
disagreements between the implementing partners:
 Establish clear organizational structures while being sensitive to local practices, processes
and structures; and
 Divide the responsibilities and tasks based on the degree and the level of participation
possible, while taking into consideration those activities that provide opportunities for local
capacity building and empowerment.
Stage 4: Mobilize local resources
Sharing of resources is another way for engendering sustainability into a human security
programme. Therefore, it is important to employ local material and labor where possible so as to
avoid undermining the local economic system and contribute to the empowerment of the affected
community(ies). Resource-sharing can also provide a solid foundation for collaboration among
multiple actors across various levels. When mobilizing local resources:
 Be aware of what already exists and build upon those resources; and
 Utilize the full spectrum of local capacities including (i) time, labor and commitment; (ii)
local knowledge, expertise and materials; and (iii) financial inputs.
Stage 5: Establish monitoring and reporting mechanisms
21
In the allocation of tasks and responsibilities, the monitoring and reporting mechanisms should be
elaborated so as to promote a flexible human security programme that can be improved upon
through feedback. Subsequently, regular monitoring and evaluation of the programme through
participation by the affected community(ies) is an essential aspect of the human security approach
and the information gained should inform the changes to the programme and the implementation
process.
Phase III. Impact Assessment
Evaluation can take many forms and have vastly different objectives. Evaluation is often thought
to occur at the end of a programme or some period after implementation in order to assess the
success of the programme. Evaluation can also take place during the programme lifecycle in order
to assess the progress and provide information for improving or re-targeting the programme. In
addition, evaluation can vary based on how and against what standards assessment occurs.
Evaluation can assess the success of a programme based on pre-defined indicators such as the
number of people served etc. or based on the impact(s) and outcomes the programme has for the
target population. From a human security perspective, evaluation should be focused on impact
assessment.
What do we mean by ‘impact’?
When we talk about impact, we are looking beyond the evaluation of the programme against
indicators of efficiency, such as, whether delivery was done on time, targets met, budget spent, etc.
Instead, we are interested in the longer term consequences of the programme, i.e., questions of
legitimacy about why we developed and implemented the programme in the first place.
Why a Human Security Impact Assessment (HSIA)?
 The purpose of an HSIA is to improve the programme and ensure that it alleviates the
identified human insecurities while at the same time avoiding negatives outcomes.
 To ensure that individuals and teams think carefully about the likely impact of their work
on people and take actions to improve strategies, policies, projects and programmes, where
appropriate.
 To assess the external environment and the changing nature of risks rather than the typical
focus on the output-input equation used in programme management.
The Six Phases of an HSIA
PHASE 1: IDENTIFY THE SCOPE OF THE HSIA
Step 1: Start with the information available
 Gather information on the human security programme


What is the main purpose of the programme?
List the main activities of the programme (for strategies list the main policy areas).
22

Who are the main beneficiaries of the programme?
 Gather the analysis, data, research on the conditions, needs, etc. of the affected
community(ies) and/or group(s).
Step 2: Identify and define the following variables
(i) The components of the human security concept
 Freedom from fear (personal, political, and community security, etc.)
 Freedom from want (economic, food, health, environmental security, etc.)
 Life with dignity (education, access to freedoms, equality, human rights, community
security, political security, etc.)
(ii) The desired outcome of protection and empowerment
(iii) The possible dimensions of insecurity








Economic insecurity
Food insecurity
Health insecurity
Environmental insecurity
Personal insecurity
Community insecurity
Political insecurity
Add your own areas of insecurity, for example, gender, educational, etc.
Step 3: Define the target groups
 The population at the national level
 The community at the group level
 People within that community (disaggregate people along various types)
PHASE II: GATHER THE EVIDENCE
Step 4: Identify direct and indirect impacts on people
 Undertake a holistic analysis (quantitative and/or qualitative) on whether the programme
contributed to promoting human security by having a positive or a negative impact on the
three freedoms under the human security concept.
Positive impact on
freedom from want,
freedom from fear and a
life of dignity
Reasons
Negative impact on
freedom from want,
freedom from fear and
a life of dignity
Reasons
Women
Men
Rural population
Urban population
Poor population
Richer population
Middle class
Religious minorities
Elderly
Children
23
Youth
Special needs persons
Step 5: Define the protection and empowerment outcomes and processes
 Analyze on how, during the process, and as an outcome of the interventions, population
groups benefited from the empowerment and protection strategies of the human security
goals.
Protection
During the Process
Through the
Outcome
Empowerment
During the Process
Through the Outcome
Women
Men
Rural population
Urban population
Poor population
Richer population
Middle class
Religious minorities
Elderly
Children
Youth
Special needs
Step 6: Define the positive and negative externalities
 Identify positive and negative externalities in different fields using the seven human security
components and the externalities framework presented earlier.
Targeted
intervention(s)
The primary
insecurity field(s) it
targets successfully
and how
The primary
insecurity field(s) it
fails to target and
why
The other insecurity
fields it also touches
on as a positive
externality and why
Ex: Intervention
meant for
improving
economic
security.
Its impact on
improving economic
security.
Its shortcomings on
improving economic
security.
Positive outcomes in
other fields such as
food, health,
environment,
personal community,
etc.
The potential pitfalls in
other insecurity fields
that could result in
negative externality(ies)
in the short and mediumterm and why
Unintended negative
outcomes in other fields.
PHASE III: ANALYZE
Step 7: If there is a negative impact on any group(s) or on other insecurity fields
 Is that impact intended (for example, the group or sector was not taken into account) or
unintended (a negative by-product)?
 How can we minimize or remove the negative impact(s)?
 How can we improve the programme’s positive impact(s)?
PHASE IV: REFLECT
Step 8: Reflect on the costs and benefits at the aggregate level
24
 Consider how to minimize harm and maximize benefits.
 Take into account the need for prioritization and trade-offs.
Step 9: Define overall changes to the programme as well as the needed changes at the
policy and the institutional levels for the future.
PHASE V: RECOMMEND
Step 10: Recommend improvements
List recommendations for action that you plan to take or that you recommend others to take as a
result of the impact assessment. At different levels:
1) Micro level (programme)
 How can the programme improve/change?
 How can the budget target better?
2) Meso and macro levels (i.e., beyond the programme level with a view towards policies)
 How can human security be institutionalized?
 How can human security policies be designed or improved upon?
 What types of new laws or amendments are needed?
3) In general
 What type of new studies may be needed?
 How can the importance of human security be better advocated?
PHASE VI: SUSTAINABILITY
Step 11: Measure the effectiveness of the HSIA by assessing its sustainability based on the
following four dimensions.
 Institutionalization: Human security initiatives developed are incorporated into
existing community/local/national institutions.
 Policy change: Changes in rules, regulations and laws of the community are
sanctioned.
 Community ownership, changing community norms: As part of the community
development and empowerment strategy, activities are initiated, owned and continued
through community efforts.
 Resources: Funding resources are part of the programme strategy so as to ensure that
activities will continue uninterrupted.
2.3 Lessons Learnt, Best Practices and Mainstreaming of Human Security
Each phase of the human security programme provides valuable information on a host of
insecurities which if shared appropriately can contribute to the advancement of human security.
25
 Developing information databanks.

Information from mapping exercises can be included in a database to create a
baseline on human insecurities. This information can then be shared with relevant
parties from:








National, district and local government
Local population
International organizations
Donor agencies
Private sector
Civil society
Academic community
Furthermore, a database on the linkages and the interconnectedness of insecurities,
as well as the impact of externalities on sectors that are often not considered
together, can provide critical information on improving human security policies,
programmes and projects by all relevant parties.
 Engaging key decision-makers is critical for strengthening the political will to advocate for
human security issues.

Relevant indicators and/or qualitative assessments, even if not a complete Human
Security Index, provide policy makers with easily accessible information about
emerging and/or ongoing human insecurities. In addition, identifying gaps in
services and resources, as well as areas or groups of high vulnerabilities,
encourages political debate and acceptance for finding concrete solutions to
identified human security challenges.
 Mainstreaming through participation.

The initial capacity building that occurs within the participatory processes under a
human security framework provide the foundations for further engagement and
action outside of a particular programme and create the opportunities to build
additional networks for collaboration, early warning, and advocacy.
 Advocating for further research.

Each phase of a human security programme provides information about gaps in
knowledge and research. In particular, the HSIA can uncover areas of neglect and
uncertainty and encourage further research and studies to be undertaken.
26
Chapter 3 - Human Security Case Studies
3.1. Human Security in Post-Conflict Situations
Over the last decade, approximately 60 countries have been identified as countries in conflict or
emerging from violent conflicts. The majority of them have been affected by intra-state or internal
wars, often acquiring a regional dimension as violence tends to spread into neighbouring states,
engulfing entire regions or sub-regions in a situation of mutual vulnerability and insecurity. Most
of these countries are amongst the world’s poorest nations with the lowest ranking human
development indicators (HDI).
Meanwhile, the intricate web of poor political conditions, socio-economic deprivation and armed
violence threatens almost every aspect of human security, putting in question peoples’ survival,
livelihood and dignity. At the same time, helping countries emerge from conflict provide
significant opportunities to promote fundamental change, to include the excluded, decrease
inequalities, strengthen social networks, and improve state-society relations.
Notwithstanding, addressing the root causes and the detrimental effects of conflicts, as well as
assisting countries towards human security and sustainable development, represent a highly
complex endeavour that lies at the forefront of the UN agenda. As explained in Human Security
Now, “helping countries recover from violent conflict [is] one of the most complex challenges
confronting the international community”(CHS, 2003: 57). Nevertheless, the urgency and the costs
in failing to secure peace, makes success in post-conflict situations critical not only to the
achievement of human security but also to the attainment of regional and international security.
I. Overview of Post-Conflict Scenarios: Characteristics, Gaps and Challenges
Although the context specificity of each post-conflict situation does not allow for standardized
blueprints, nevertheless, consideration of the main characteristics typical to most post-conflict
situations, as well as the gaps and challenges commonly faced, can help establish a framework
under which the key elements of human security are identified and addressed.
Main characteristics of post-conflict situations

Highly volatile security
While ceasefire agreements and peace settlements signal the end of violent conflicts, however,
post-conflict conditions are inherently unstable and in most cases tensions between opposing
forces continue to persist. Typically, in the immediate aftermath of a peace settlement,
deteriorating socio-economic conditions, torn social fabrics, sharpened inequalities, exclusion,
and ethnic grievances often exacerbate the very causes that instigated the violence in the first
place. As a result, over half of post-conflict countries return to civil war, with this percentage
even higher when control over natural resources is at stake.

Civilian impact
Contemporary conflicts have an overwhelming civilian impact, often disproportionately
27
impacting women, children and other vulnerable groups. The humanitarian consequences of
large-scale armed violence, including internal displacement of local populations, refugee
flows, spread of diseases and lack of access to food and shelter, shape the post-conflict terrain,
both during the immediate post-conflict period as well as the ensuing transition phase from
humanitarian relief to development.

Weak institutional capacity
In addition to the obvious destruction of physical infrastructure, including civilian property,
and significant disruption to economic production and development, post-conflict settings
typically confront a complete collapse of state institutions and societal structures.
Subsequently, government are often unwilling or unable to secure their borders and territory,
deliver basic services and public goods, and protect and empower their people, including the
most vulnerable. This weakness and/or disintegration of state institutions results in the
emergence of new non-state actors as well as an increased interdependency between national
and international actors.

Militarization of social, political and economic life
Militarization of social life, politics and the economy, and the deep trauma faced by individuals
and communities are some of the main features of post-war societies. Meanwhile, to rebuild
the economic, political and social foundations of war-torn societies requires the provision of
national, local and community security including the reform of the security sector; the
dismantling of war economies; the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of
ex-combatants; as well as community reconciliation and rehabilitation. Each of these functions
is interrelated and the interaction between them must be considered in any post-conflict
situation.

Non-linear transition period
Too often there is a tendency to approach transition from war to peace as a linear process –
from humanitarian relief to rehabilitation and reconstruction, leading to development. As noted
by the CHS, “the presumption has been that only short-term relief is feasible immediately after
the conflict ends and that any effort at that time towards rehabilitation and reconstruction
would likely be wasted” (CHS: 2003: 59). In reality, however, post-conflict recovery does not
follow such a continuum and cannot be compartmentalized into distinct timeframes under
conventional, sector-based approaches.
Gaps and Challenges
Despite considerable efforts and resources directed by the international community towards
promoting peace and security, the overall record of peacebuilding has been mixed at best. Past
experience demonstrates that the complexity of peacebuilding operations requires constant
assessment, examination, reflection, and improvement so as to overcome the challenges that postconflict interventions confront and to increase the overall effectiveness of peacebuilding
operations.
28
As described by the CHS in Human Security Now (CHS: 2003: 59), from a human security
perspective, current approaches to post-conflict reconstruction face the following gaps and
challenges:
Box 1. Gaps in Today Post-Conflict Strategies
From a human security perspective, today’s postconflict strategies have many shortcomings, leaving
many gaps:
Security gaps
• Military troops are frequently deployed to separate
combatants—troops that are ill-equipped to deal with
public security issues, such as civil unrest, crime and the
trafficking in people.
• From the outset, emphasis in peacekeeping operations
is on pursuing an exit strategy that is not directly related
to the security needs of the people.
• Security strategies do not take into account the needs
of humanitarian and development actors.
Governance gaps
• Peace-building is seen as a “top-down” process,
commonly led and imposed by outside actors—rather
than as a process to be owned by national institutions
and people.
• Little attention goes to building national and local civil
society and communities—or to drawing on their
capacities and expertise.
• Organization of national elections receives the most
attention (and is often seen as a maneuver for handing
over international mandates and responsibilities to the
newly elected authorities), with little regard for further
efforts to support governance and democratization.
• Reconciliation efforts pay too little attention to the
coexistence of divided communities and the building of
trust.
Gaps in international responses
• The international architecture is segregated along
security, humanitarian and development lines,
encouraging fragmented and competitive responses.
• International actors tend to focus on mandates—not on
presence, comparative advantages and needs of specific
situations. Coordination is emphasized, not integration.
• Too little attention goes to building national capacities
and institutions, resulting in the absence of national
ownership.
• Humanitarian agencies focus on speedy interventions
but often fail to consider the impact on reconstruction and
development activities. Development actors require long
periods to mobilize resources and implement their plans,
hampering the conversion of humanitarian activities to
longer term development strategies.
Resource gaps
• Assistance tends to peak in the early phases, when the
capacity to absorb it is low. It has been difficult to sustain
aid over the medium term, just when reconstruction and
development take off.
• International actors use many fundraising
mechanisms—comprehensive appeals, round-tables,
consultative groups and country-specific trust funds—
some competing, many raising false expectations about
the amounts pledged. Negotiations over debt arrears often
delay the full participation of international financial
institutions.
• Donors and multilateral agencies separate their budgets
into humanitarian and development assistance, making it
difficult to transfer funds from one cluster to another.
• Funds are earmarked for specific activities and
countries, reflecting the primacy of economic, strategic or
political interests over human security needs.
The added value of the Human Security approach in post-conflict situations and recovery

First, by placing individuals and communities at the centre of analysis, the human security
approach greatly alters the perspective typically adopted in post-conflict interventions.
Subsequently, the local dimensions of the conflict, recovery, and sustainability are placed at
the forefront rather than being secondary to international and/or institutional approaches. This
repositioning has broad implications for the assessment, planning, implementation and
evaluation of post-conflict initiatives.
29

Second, the highly complex and interconnected nature of the causes and consequences of
violent conflicts cannot be tackled in isolation but rather must be understood in their dynamic
and interrelated forms and addressed in a complementary manner. The human security
approach assesses these interconnections, considers their positive and negative externalities,
and frames the designing of multi-sector strategies in an integrated manner.

Third, an overemphasis on national security and the failure to advance lasting peace illustrates
the need for more comprehensive strategies that take into account the needs of different
sectors and segments of the affected populations, while recognizing that internal inequalities
and tensions cannot be ignored and in most cases lead to resumption of tensions and renewed
conflicts.

Fourth, full partnership with the local population through top-down and bottom-up strategies.
The human security approach provides the analysis for identifying local capacities and
resources as well as the framework for linking top-down and bottom-up approaches that
promote stronger synergies between state and societal responses, thereby strengthening the
impact of both on the effectiveness of peacebuilding.

Fifth, the large numbers of actors involved in post-conflict situations calls for collaborative and
participatory frameworks that can best manage diversity and ensure ownership and capacitybuilding at the local-beneficiary level. The human security approach with its emphasis on
people-centered solutions advances such a framework in a collaborative and integrative
manner.
II. Human Security Principles and Approach in Post-Conflict Situations
To reposition the focus of post-conflict recovery towards the achievement of human security
encompasses adopting an approach that is people-centered, multi-sectoral, comprehensive,
context-specific, and prevention-oriented.
Table I: The Implications of a Human Security Approach in Post-Conflict Scenarios
HS Principle
HS Approach



People-centered




Multi-sectoral



Put populations impacted by conflicts, including the most vulnerable, at the centre of
analysis and planning.
Emphasize reconciliation, reintegration and rehabilitation at the individual and
community level and not only through large-scale institutional reforms.
Consider and evaluate the impact of conflict interventions and donor policies from a
both a human and state security perspective.
Adopt participatory processes where possible so as to consider information from the
points of view of those affected.
Think about local capacities and resources in order to identify gaps in protection and
empowerment strategies.
Shift from a military focus towards public safety and reform of the state security
sector.
Analyze the inter-linkages and externalities between e.g., security, health, education,
human rights, etc. No element of post-conflict transition can be tackled in isolation.
Adopt inclusive and multi-actor approaches.
Minimize negative externalities that can cause a conflict to relapse.
Ensure coherence among humanitarian, security and development approaches.
30



Comprehensive






Context-specific
Prevention-orientated









Link people and institutions towards an inclusive and representative governance
processes.
Take a multi-dimensional approach, engaging a broad landscape of issues, sectors
and disciplines (see human security clusters for post-conflict situations).
Recognize that lasting peace requires social, economic and security dimensions to be
addressed in a manner that captures their inter-linkages.
Engage multiple actors from various levels including the local, district, national,
regional and international.
Provide extra attention to excluded groups and focus on social inequalities and
reconciliation.
Employ a dual ‘protection and empowerment’ framework to peacebuilding
strategies.
Adopt context-specific strategies to each unique post-conflict situation.
Pay attention to the root causes behind the conflict in a given context.
Conduct an in-depth analysis of targeted issues and populations from both a local
and an external perspective.
Work with the principles, norms and institutions that are linked with the history and
the culture of the war-torn society.
Extend analysis to capture the regional dynamics of the conflict where appropriate.
Situate insecurity within other contexts (district, national, regional, global).
Conflict prevention must be included as an element of peacebuilding.
Address root causes of conflict and the ensuing insecurities.
Develop early warning systems.
Support building of local capacity and ownership to ensure sustainability.
Conduct mapping at different time periods to identify trends and provide
information for preventative solutions.
Identify most vulnerable and most neglected areas or populations.
III. Human Security Programme Phases in Post Conflict Situations
Phase 1: Analysis, Mapping and Planning
From a human security perspective, post-conflict situations cannot be fully understood without the
input of those experiencing the insecurity. And while research and analysis have brought to the
forefront the multitude of challenges and gaps inherent in post-conflict interventions, however,
unless the full range of stakeholders and beneficiaries are not engaged, heard and respected, these
obstacles will not be surmounted. Therefore, in the mapping, analysis and planning phase of a
post-conflict intervention, the following key processes must be included:

Identify the most critical and widespread threats, vulnerabilities and insecurities of the
affected community(ies), their relation to other communities and to the larger context. The
participatory needs/vulnerabilities and capacity analysis described in Chapter 2 should be used
in developing this phase.

Assess the local capacities and resources of the affected community(ies) including those
capacities/resources that were used in past situations to address insecurities; those that have not
been mobilized due to the conflict situation; and those that can be built upon to actively create
lasting peace.

Address the gaps in the existing protection and empowerment infrastructures.
31

Assess the actors and sectors involved: What are their roles? What are their activities? How
do they relate to one another? How can coherence be developed between them?
Analysis of threats, needs/vulnerabilities and local capacities
To ensure human security, the primary goal is to restore broadly-framed security and dignity to
individuals and communities. Therefore, a thorough assessment of the actual needs/vulnerabilities
and capacities of the individuals and communities from their perspective will be the cornerstone of
any human security programme in post-conflict situations. This however can be a daunting task
where massive vulnerabilities span across multiple sectors and at multiple levels. To achieve such
an objective, the following table outlines the possible interrelations between (i) threats to human
security, (ii) needs/vulnerabilities across various levels, and (iii) the capacities available to respond
to these threats.
Table II: Post-Conflict Needs, Vulnerabilities and Capacity Matrix
Examples of Needs/Vulnerabilities
Examples of PostConflict Threats
Economic
- Increased poverty
and unemployment
- Prevalence of war
economies/illegal
networks
- Collapse of the
economy
- Destruction of
property and
infrastructure
- Lack of economic
opportunities
- Discrepancies in aid
- Internal and
external economic
shocks
Food
- Destruction of food
systems as a result of
war
- Hunger
- Famine
- Disruptions of food
supply or allocation
- Malnutrition
Local
National
Regional
Examples of
Capacities
(individual/
community
level)
**NB: Distinguish between different groups as relevant, according e.g.
to age, gender and socio-economic status
- Self-sufficiency
- Regional economic
- Diminished human
- Embedded war
(agriculture)
instability/
capital
economy (relationship
interdependency (e.g. - Community
- Lack of access to
between conflict
weak border/customs networks/
gainful employment
causes/enablers and
cooperatives for
- Prevalence of illegal economic institutions or control)
markets/ trade
- Restricted
economic networks at practices)
- Financial
the community level
- Lack of capacities and opportunities for
reserves/
regional economic
resources to
remittances
development
reinvigorate national
- Interrelated illegal/
economy and embark
criminal economic
on sustainable
economic development networks
- Lack of sufficient
regional integration
to respond to
economic shocks and
dismantle crossborder illegal
economy
- Food reserves
- Lack of physical
- Inability of the state to - Reliance on
regional trade for
and distribution
and economic access
ensure food production
agricultural products
systems
to basic food
and equitable
and manufactured
- Diversified
distribution
food-related produce
agriculture and
- Inability of the state
- Lack of sufficient
economy
economy to
regional integration
absorb/withstand
to respond to foodexternal shocks
- Lack of capacities and related crises
resources to
reinvigorate destroyed
32
food production and
distribution systems
- Destroyed health
infrastructure
- Overburdened health
system
Health
- Spread of disease
- Unsafe food
- Physical traumas
- Highly prone to
illnesses especially
the most vulnerable
- Lack of access to
health care
Environmental
- Illegal exploitation
of natural resources
- Unequal access to
resources
- Environmental
degradation,
deforestation
- Resource depletion
- Unsafe/unstable
natural habitat
- Lack of decisionmaking power
- Lack of access and
management of local
land and resources
- Lack of early-warning
and response systems
for protection and
recovery from the
short- and long-term
ravages of nature, manmade threats in nature,
and deterioration of the
natural environment.
- Underdeveloped
legislative frameworks
for sustainable and
equitable management
of natural resources
Personal
- State violence:
torture by military,
police
- Increased
criminality
- Psycho-social
trauma
- Gender-based
violence
- Displacement
- National crossborder threats
- Human trafficking
- Prevalence of
terrorist groups
- Lack of ability to
protect one’s self
from physical
violence, whether
from the state or
external states, from
violent individuals
and sub-state actors,
from domestic abuse,
or from predatory
adults
 Gender-based
violence
 Child soldiers
- Destruction of
property/shortage of
and inadequate
housing
- Loss of traditional
relationships and
values and from
sectarian and ethnic
violence.
- Absence of rule of law
- Lack of state systems
for reconciliation and
rehabilitation
- Gaps in ensuring
equitable treatment of
different groups
Community
- Inter-group/ interethnic violence
- Exclusion and
sharpened
inequalities
- Weakened cultural
diversity
- Lack of ability to
protect communities
from the loss of
traditional relationships
and values and from
sectarian and ethnic
violence
- Non-representative
political processes
- Spread of
- Access to
communicable
information and
diseases
community- Lack of crossbased health care
border capacity to
and insurance
manage movement of schemes
people and goods
- Indigenous/
traditional health
practices
- Natural resource
- Lack of regional
capital
early-warning and
response systems for - Natural
environmental
protection and
recovery
recovery from the
processes (e.g.
short- and long-term
forests
ravages of nature,
recovering from
man-made threats in
fires)
nature, and
- Biodiversity
deterioration of the
natural environment. - Indigenous/
traditional
practices that
respect the
environment
- Coping
- Underdeveloped
mechanisms
state and societal
structures to
- Adaptive
strategies
manage/integrate
- Memory of past
migrant and refugee
disasters
flows
- Fuelling existing
ethnic tensions across
bordering
communities
- Potential for
creating new
hostilities amongst
neighboring
communities/groups
- Lack of regional
social cohesion
- Social capital
- Coping
mechanisms
- Adaptive
strategies
- Memory of past
disasters
- Local nongovernmental
organizations or
traditional
organisms
33
Political
- Political repression
- Impunity
- Human rights
violations by
conflicting parties
- Political violence
and repression
- Interest-based/nonrepresentative politics
- Corruption
- Human rights
violations
- Weak/ nonfunctioning local
civil society
- Not respecting basic
human rights of a
population or group
- Lack of good
governance
- Non-cohesive and
non-integrated
regional institutions
- Lack of a regional
civil society
- Good
governance
- Ethical
standards
- Local leadership
- Accountability
mechanisms
Based on the above assessment, gaps in the human security needs/vulnerabilities and capacities of
the affected community(ies) are highlighted and are used to identify the needed strategies as
indicated in the following table:
Table III: Examples of Post-Conflict Strategies and Capacities Needed for Addressing Human
Insecurities
Human security
components
Economic security











Food security






Health security

Post-conflict strategies to enhance
protection and empowerment
Infrastructure recovery and restoring
access to basic services (e.g. transport,
communications, water, electricity)
Poverty alleviation
Agricultural rehabilitation
Dismantling of war economy and illegal
economic networks
Enlarging opportunities for people
through e.g. training, skills
development and empowerment at the
community level
Development of productive activities
for ex-combatants, returnees and
impoverished groups
Provision of micro-finance
opportunities
Clarifying property rights
Macroeconomic development and job
creation
Establishment of social safety nets
Provision of well-coordinated,
predictable and multi-faceted aid
Guarantee access to nutrition
Reinforce peoples’ ability to ensure
access to food
Agricultural rehabilitation programmes
Equitable food and agricultural
assistance
Famine early warning systems
Revitalization of rural communities and
local production processes and
distribution systems
Guarantee access to health care and
Capacities needed





Economic capital
Human capital
Public finance
Financial reserves
Diversified agriculture and economy
 Diversified agriculture and economy
 Local and national distribution
systems
 Knowledge on health related matters
34
Environmental
security
Personal security
Community security
Political security
health services
 Community-based disease prevention,
health promotion, nutrition promotion,
epidemic preparedness, disease
surveillance and control
 Risk-sharing arrangements that pool
membership funds and promote
community-based insurance schemes
 Improved water and sanitation facilities
 Specific attention to poor people in rural
areas, particularly women and children
 Maintaining/creating healthy physical
environment
 Assure fair and equitable access to
scarce water and land resources
 Early warning and response
mechanisms for natural hazards and/or
man-made disasters
 Sustainable use and management of
natural resources
 Landmine awareness campaigns
 Rule of law
 Explicit and enforced protection of
human rights and civil liberties
 Provision of psychosocial or
psychological dimension for
overcoming trauma
 Reconciliation at the individual level
 Empowerment of women and other
vulnerable groups
 Victims support
 Integration of conflict-afflicted
individuals
 Explicit and enforced protection of
ethnic groups and community identity
 Protection from oppressive traditional
practices, harsh treatment towards
women, or discrimination against
ethnic/indigenous/refugee groups
 Social renewal primarily focusing on
establishing civil society structures
 Social reintegration of former
combatants; and smooth repatriation of
refugees and displaced persons
 Overcoming culture of violence and
identity politics
 Reconciliation and community
coexistence
 Trust building in local community
networks
 Protection of human rights
 Protection from military dictatorships
and abuse
 Protection from political or state
repression, torture, ill treatment,
unlawful detention and imprisonment
 Indigenous/traditional health practices
 Natural resource capital
 Natural barriers to storm action (e.g.
coral reefs)
 Natural environmental recovery
processes (e.g. forests recovering
from fires)
 Biodiversity
 Indigenous/traditional practices that
respect the environment
 Coping mechanisms
 Adaptive strategies
 Memory of past disasters





Social capital
Coping mechanisms
Adaptive strategies
Memory of past disasters
Local non-governmental
organizations or traditional organisms




Good governance
Ethical standards
Local leadership
Accountability mechanisms
35
 Development of local/national civil
society groups
 Political renewal: creation of public and
legal institutions that safeguard legal
certainty and democratic participation
(good governance), investigate human
rights violations and reform and/or help
to dismantle the apparatus of violence
Assessing multi-sectorality and externalities in post-conflict situations
The human security framework for assessing externalities, as detailed in Chapter 2, provides the
methodology for detecting both positive and negative spillovers across multiple sectors impacting
human security. Such an exercise is critical in post-conflict situations as even minor unintended
effects can cause significant disruption to the peace process. In addition, it allows for the
maximization of impact, while also providing the foundation for collaboration, inter-agency/multiactor planning and the pooling of resources.
Prioritizing in post-conflict situations
Post-conflict peacebuilding requires a broad approach that no single sector and/or organization can
tackle alone. Therefore, a clear added value of the human security approach is its insistence on
multi-sectorality and coherence among actors and programmes, as well as through a human
security assessment that diminishes negative externalities between interventions. Clustering the
vast amount of information gathered during the assessment into logical categories will aid in
determining their relationships to one another as well as to the most critical points of leverage for
positive change.
Furthermore, while retaining a multi-dimensional focus, human security sharpens attention on the
core sets of freedoms and rights that are under threat in any given post-conflict scenario. It
therefore enables the identification of the primary insecurities and vulnerabilities that need to be
addressed and the prioritization of the strategies required for reconciliation, reintegration and
rehabilitation in each context.
The following table illustrates the clusters for post-conflict peacebuilding as established by the
CHS (CHS: 2003: 60)
Table IV: Key Human Security Clusters Following Violent Conflicts
Public safety
Humanitarian
relief
Control armed
elements
- Enhance ceasefire
- Disarm
combatants
- Demobilize
combatants
Facilitate return of
conflict afflicted
people
- Internally
displaced persons
(IDPs)
- Refugees
Rehabilitation
and
reconstruction
Integrated conflict
afflicted people
- Internally
displaced persons
(IDPs)
- Refugees
- Armed
combatants
Reconciliation
and coexistence
End impunity
- Set up tribunals
- Involve
traditional justice
processes
Governance and
empowerment
Establish rule of law
framework
- Institute constitution,
judicial system, legal
reform
- Adopt legislation
- Promote human rights
36
Protect civilians
- Establish law and
order
- Clear landmines
- Collect small arms
Assure food
security
- Meet nutrition
standards
- Launch food
production
Rehabilitate
infrastructure
- Roads
- Housing
- Power
- Transportation
Establish truth
- Set up truth
commission
- Promote
forgiveness
- Restore dignity of
victims
Initiate political reform
- Institutions
- Democratic processes
Build national
security institutions
- Police
- Military
- Integrate/ dissolve
non-state armed
elements
Ensure health
security
- Provide access to
basic health care
- Prevent spread of
infectious diseases
- Provide trauma
and mental health
care
Promote social
protection
- Employment
- Food
- Health
- Education
- Shelter
Announce
amnesties
- Immunity from
prosecution for
lesser crimes
- Reparation for
victims
Strengthen civil society
- Participation
- Accountability
- Capacity building
Protect external
security
- Combat illegal
weapons and drugs
trade
- Combat trafficking
of people
- Control borders
Establish
emergency safety
net for people at
risk
- Women (femaleheaded
households);
children (soldiers);
elderly; indigenous
people; missing
people
Dismantle war
economy
- Fight criminal
networks
- Re-establish
market economy
- Provide microcredit
Promote
coexistence
- Encourage
community-based
initiatives (longterm)
- Rebuild social
capital
Promote access to
information
- Independent media
- Transparency
The “Protection and Empowerment” framework
In addition to prioritizing the strategies required for reconciliation, reintegration and rehabilitation,
the human security approach also entails the “protection and empowerment” framework. This
framework expands the arena for political, social and economic participation and ensures that the
necessary coherence involved between the requisite ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ strategies
genuinely help enhance the safety and the resilience of the affected community(ies).
By guaranteeing public safety and other protective mechanisms and by promoting authentic public
participation and implementation, the protection and empowerment framework strengthens civic
engagement, reinforces state-society relations, and breeds a culture of ownership that allows
communities to develop long-term horizons and to consider investing in peaceful activities. In
contrast, the reverse can be expected when protection and empowerment processes are treated in
isolation and fail to respond to post-conflict situations through an integrated protection and
empowerment framework.
Phase 2: Implementation
Peacebuilding initiatives are arguably the most complex international endeavours. They have the
dual goal of strengthening state-society relations as well as increasing ownership and sustainability
37
through local engagement. Meanwhile, countries engaged in international post-conflict operations
are also host to a large diversity of external actors. The following table illustrates some of the
myriad actors involved in post-conflict peacebuilding situations.
Table V: Examples of Actors Involved in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding
Public sector stakeholders
Local
National













Local government/councils
IDPs
Refugees
Former combatants
Community police
Ministers and advisors
Civil servants and departments
Elected representatives
Courts
Human rights councils
Political parties
Military / Police
International bodies (UN, World
Bank, WTO, ICC)
International
Civil society stakeholders




Community groups
Local NGOs
Religious groups
Women’s groups





Media
Religious groups
Schools and universities
Social movements and
advocacy groups
Trade unions
National NGOs
International NGOs
International media
International advocacy
groups
International trade unions












Private sector
stakeholders
Individual business
leader
Corporations and
businesses
Business
associations
Professional bodies
Financial institutions
IFIs
Multinational
corporations
In such an environment, the devastation that conflict places on the social fabric of a given society
needs to be repaired, and to achieve this objective, local capacity building must be the cornerstone
of a human security programme to peacebuilding operations. And while, top-down approaches can
address some of this through fair and transparent justice mechanisms, however, the strengthening
of communities and the reconciliation necessary for true participatory ownership must also be
prioritized.
Furthermore, experience has illustrated that post-conflict peacebuilding efforts have not yet
adequately capitalized on the immense knowledge, cultural practices, and the existing local
capacities of the affected community(ies). Partnerships between external and local actors are
powerful human security tools in post-conflict peacebuilding situations and can provide the space,
resources, and the training to shift the ownership of the process from the international to the
national and local actors, thereby enhancing local capacities and consolidating peace and recovery.
The Stages of Participatory Implementation
Stage 1: Present the programme design to the affected community(ies)
 Be aware of the conflict context in order to make decisions with regards to the different
types and levels of participation in order to ensure safety of local participants.
 Make strategic decisions in bringing together different groups so as to not exacerbate
existing tensions and inequalities.
 Allow opportunities for feedback from the community about the programme design and the
process of implementation.
38
Stage 2: Establish a committee for overseeing the implementation
 Provide opportunities for the emergence of natural and legitimate leadership from the local
community.
 Ensure representation from most heavily impacted communities and groups.
Stage 3: Allocate tasks and responsibilities
 Employ transparent decision-making processes in order to ensure that all voices are heard.
 Be sensitive to local norms and practices as well as gender.
Stage 4: Mobilize local resources
 Pay attention to and build upon unexploited local capacities and resources.
 Set common goals and vision so as to strengthen community reconciliation and capacities
to address current and future challenges.
Stage 5: Establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism
 Establish links between implementation, monitoring and evaluation and discuss feedback
mechanisms.
 Engage local participants through all three processes.
Phase 3: Human Security Impact Assessment (HSIA)
Impact assessment is an integral component of the human security framework and must be
employed from the early stages in any post-conflict programme. This allows for monitoring of
results at different phases, adaptation to changing conditions, and consideration of the evolving
human security needs of the affected community(ies). Accordingly, HSIA in post-conflict
situations introduces the following elements as inherent components of peacebuilding evaluation:

Use of a wide range of both quantitative and qualitative indicators, including public
perceptions and community narratives based on inclusive, consultative, and interactive
bottom-up processes that take into account the views and experiences of the local groups
and the beneficiaries.

Comprehensive evaluation that integrates the seven different components of human
security and thereby allows due consideration to a wide rage of variables that determine the
conditions for durable peace.

Measurement of programme impact at different levels and on a group-by-group basis. This
methodology has the potential to:
-
Show whether the programme has succeeded in reaching the intended beneficiaries.
Reveal whether additional groups have benefited as a result of the programme and
highlight ways to broaden coverage if some are excluded.
Provide crucial information on prevailing inequalities and marginalization, as well as
consider ways to alter the situation.
39
-
Establish the level and nature of horizontal inequalities – often attributed as the root
causes behind many conflicts.
Identify groups who could be multipliers for social change and conflict transformation.
Assess if and how post-conflict peacebuilding programmes have been successful at
empowering and/or protecting different groups.

Sufficient flexibility to review and explain the context-specific expressions of insecurities
in any given post-conflict scenario.

Assessment of positive and negative externalities on different groups (including crossborder entities) and different components of human security. Such a framework can help
highlight and evaluate the inter-linkages and the overlaps between the different responses,
thereby providing the basis for consideration of concrete ways in which different actors can
collaborate, coordinate and integrate their activities.

Assessment of intended and unintended consequences of security, humanitarian and
development projects on the structures and processes of violence and peace.

Linking programme outputs and outcomes (on the micro level) to changes and impacts
achieved at the macro level, including change in policies and societal structures.

A framework for providing recommendations, identifying best practices, highlighting areas
for improvement, and up-streaming key issues.
40
3.2. Human Security in Situations of Food Insecurity
In 2007, there was an estimated 923 million people, an increase of more than 80 million since
1990 (FAO, 2008), who faced persistent hunger and food insecurity. Meanwhile, due to conflictinduced emergencies as well as rising natural disasters, demand for food assistance has continued
to grow. The interaction of these different types of food-induced emergencies and the severity of
the crises, have raised critical concerns regarding the assessment, response, recovery and the
prevention of food crisis and its impact on peace, security and development.
As a basic need, food security constitutes a fundamental element of development and growth.
Moreover, the recent attention to food insecurity as a consequence of soaring food prices has also
shed light on the critical interlinkages between food security and overall human security. Despite
widespread impact in both developed and developing countries, the communities most heavily
impacted by food insecurity reside in countries largely in Africa and Asia. Recognized as lowincome food-deficit countries by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), food comprises
between half to three-quarters of household purchasing power in these regions, a condition in
which according to the World Bank there is no margin for survival in situations of food-induced
emergencies (Kuntjoro & Jamil, 2008). In addition, there have also been notable reversals in
development gains in other regions such as Latin America which had experienced more than a
decade of steady progress towards reducing hunger and under-nourishment.
I. Overview of Situations of Food Insecurity: Context, Gaps and Challenges
The complexity of ensuring food security presents many challenges to identifying the most
appropriate strategies. And although the context specificity of each situation of food insecurity
does not allow for standardized responses or solutions, nevertheless, consideration of the overall
context, typical to most situations of food insecurity, as well as the gaps and challenges that they
commonly face, can help establish a framework under which the key elements of human security
can be identified and addressed.
Main characteristics of food insecure situations

Complexity of driving forces and underlying causes
Food security is a highly complex issue that rests on a delicate balance between the availability of
supply and demand for food-related products. In many situations of food insecurity, growth in
demand outstrips growth in supply creating food shortages. However, the underlying dynamics
which create food insecure regions go beyond direct supply and demand conditions for foodrelated products and include factors such as changes in developed economy agricultural policies;
drops in production due to environmental conditions, increases in energy prices, inputs costs and
demand for bio-fuels; changes in consumption patterns; and speculation leading to volatility in the
financial markets.
41

Threat of rising food prices
While there are a number of structural factors driving food insecurity, the recent rise in food prices
is one the main causes exacerbating the state of global food insecurity, driving millions of people
into poverty, worsening the state of the world’s most food insecure regions and threatening longterm human security. The rise in food prices have widespread impacts from increasing the
proportion of undernourished people in the world, to reversals in development gains, both of which
will have detrimental effects on long-term human development and human capital.

Impact on the most vulnerable
The poorest, the landless, children and female-headed households are the most heavily impacted in
situations of food insecurity. Furthermore, the vast majority of urban and rural households in
developing countries rely heavily on food purchases. Subsequently any fluctuation in the
availability, access, and prices of food-related products has significant consequences on the
household purchasing power of the most vulnerable. In the current context of high food prices,
these communities and groups suffer critical losses as a result of reduced real income and tradeoffs that tend to increase insecurities in other areas (e.g., spending less on healthcare,
infrastructure, education, etc.). Moreover, food insecurity also impacts the most vulnerable
countries – that is, those that are already in need of emergency interventions and food assistance
due to other factors such as conflicts and environmental disasters.

Chronic and transitory/cyclical nature of food insecurity
There are two primary types of food insecurity: those which are chronic and persist over long
periods of time and those which are transitory or cyclical. These are important distinctions for
appropriately addressing situations of food insecurity and for drawing attention to those who may
not be food insecure in a given moment and yet be close to the ‘zone of vulnerability’.
Gaps and Challenges

Gaps in protection and empowerment
To date, international and national strategies to tackle food insecurity have in most cases employed
top-down approaches, focusing on trade-related measures and emergency interventions without
sufficiently considering complementary bottom-up approaches that can effectively enhance the
resilience of local communities and reduce risks for the most vulnerable. This has resulted in the
following gaps:

Gaps in protective measures: Social safety nets and social protection programmes in both
developing and developed countries are falling short of providing adequate protection from
food insecurity. In addition, intermediate shock absorbers are lacking to buffer individuals
and communities from suffering the impact of volatility in food-related prices and food
supply.

Gaps in empowerment measures: More attention needs to be given on supporting and
empowering vulnerable groups, particularly small-scale farmers, female-headed
households, and the poorest groups within societies. There is an urgent need to provide
42
sustainable opportunities so that these groups have the means to absorb and benefit from
rising food prices, improve their productivity and secure their livelihoods and dignity.



Gaps in international responses

Despite significant global commitments, such as the recent creation of the UN Secretary
General’s High Level Task Force (HLTF) on the Global Food Security Crisis and the
ensuing Comprehensive Framework for Action (CFA), the international community has not
yet implemented a concerted approach to food insecurity.

There has been an overall lack of coordination and coherence among international
responses as many countries have taken unilateral action (mainly in the form of export
restrictions and price controls) to address the impact of food insecurity and the effects of
soaring food prices. Such measures have resulted in ad hoc responses and in many cases
have negative consequences on global food security and poverty reduction.

Lack of coherence is also evident in food aid policies as donor countries have failed to
introduce a unified response to food insecurity. As a result, developing countries are often
recipients to a number of different initiatives and in the absence of an overall strategic
framework are asked to implement multiple plans from different donors.

There is a persistent gap between emergency food assistance initiatives by humanitarian
actors and longer-term development programmes. Food security has often been addressed
solely through humanitarian responses and while such responses are critical to addressing
the crises, nevertheless, different types of initiatives by other communities of actors are
also needed in order to ensure sustainable solutions for long-term food security.
Resource gaps

Despite the approximately $US12.3 billion5 that was pledged at the FAO Rome High Level
Conference in June 2008, this figure is significantly below the $US25 billion – $US40
billion estimated by the United Nations as necessary to increase agricultural production and
provide social protection in countries most hit by the current food crisis.

In addition, over the last decades, public and private investments in agriculture in
developing countries have significantly declined, resulting in stagnant or lower crop yield
growth in most of the developing regions. External assistance to agriculture had followed
similar trends, having dropped from 20% of ODA in the early 1980s to 3% by 2007 (FAO
CFA, 2008).
The challenge of worrisome long-term trends

5
Projections by international organizations, including the United Nations and the World
Bank, all point to the persistence of high food prices in the future and their potential
negative effects on developing countries’ markets. As asserted by the HLTF “the economic
and structural factors driving food markets are expected to keep food prices 50% higher
than their 2004 levels until at least 2015” (FAO CFA: 2008).
This is in addition to US$6 billion pledged earlier by the international community.
43
The added value of the Human Security approach to food insecurity
First, with its emphasis on people-centered approaches, human security ensures that
developments and strategies at the international level take into account local conditions while
giving due consideration to the interplay between international and local dynamics surrounding
food security. This approach provides for a more in-depth analysis of the local conditions and the
need to promote an enabling environment where individuals and communities can be free
from hunger and poverty.
Second, recognizing the complexity, interrelatedness, as well as the rapidly changing nature of
threats to food security, human security provides a dynamic and integrated framework to
analyze and address the inter-linkages and externalities between policies and programmes related
to food security. As such, human security necessitates participatory processes that involve all the
relevant actors and ensures coherence amongst sectors and responses.
Third, human security puts forward a comprehensive approach to food insecurity that goes
beyond traditional food security frameworks with their focus on demand and supply conditions
and takes into account the broader aspects of human security such as health, economic and
environmental security. By considering the different ways that food insecurity threatens peoples’
survival, livelihood and dignity, human security therefore comprehensively address the full scope
of peoples’ vulnerabilities vis-à-vis natural and human-induced disasters.
Fourth, while some of the economic and structural factors behind food insecurity are common to
most countries, the expressions, impacts and specific root causes exacerbating food insecurity can
vary significantly across different settings. As such, human security adopts a context-specific
approach that takes into account the particular context, insecurities and the needs of the most
vulnerable in a given situation. Moreover, human security encourages the consideration of
contextualized solutions that are embedded in local knowledge, experience and realities, while
building on untapped capacities at the community level.
Fifth, central to the human security framework is the question of how to shield individuals and
communities from ‘downturn risks’ in a truly sustainable and empowering manner. In situations of
food insecurity, a human security approach therefore sharpens the attention on preventative
strategies to reduce risks, to address chronic vulnerabilities that lie at the root causes of food
insecurity, and to strengthen community resilience.
II. Human Security Principles and Approach in Situations of Food Insecurity
Anchored in the five human security principles, a human security approach to food insecurity
includes the following considerations.
Table I: The Implications of a Human Security Approach in Food Insecure Scenarios
HS Principle
HS Approach

People-centered

Put populations affected by food insecurity, especially the most vulnerable, at the centre
of analysis and planning.
Consider and evaluate the impact of food assistance interventions and donor policies
44






Multi-sectoral








Comprehensive


Context-specific







Prevention-oriented



from a community-based perspective.
Adopt participatory processes wherever possible so as to consider information from the
points of view of those affected.
Think about local risks, capacities and resources in order to identify gaps in current food
insecurity frameworks and responses.
Work with the principles, norms, institutions that are linked with the agrarian practices
and cultures of the affected community(ies).
Recognize the wide scope and interrelatedness of challenges to food security,
implicating and spreading across humanitarian, development, human rights and security
fields.
Analyze inter-linkages and externalities across a variety of programmes linked to food
security
Analyze the interplay between policies and dynamics at the local, regional and
international levels.
Build on positive externalities that can accelerate positive change, and minimize
negative externalities that can cause setbacks in agricultural development.
Adopt inclusive, multi-actor approaches across a multitude of relevant fields.
Ensure coherence among short-term emergency food relief and longer-term
development approaches related to food security.
Link people and institutions towards an inclusive and representative governance
processes.
Adopt a broad, multi-dimensional approach to understand and address food insecurity
and peoples’ vulnerabilities.
Recognize that food security requires health, environmental, political and socioeconomic dimensions to be addressed in a manner that captures their inter-linkages.
Engage a broad landscape of issues, sectors and disciplines as relevant and appropriate.
Engage multiple actors from various levels including the local, district, national,
regional and international: e.g., national governments, international institutions, donors,
civil society, private sector, small producers, trade unions, labor and women’s
organizations.
Address cross-cutting issues by taking into account national and international
developments that affect implementation and impact (including public sector reform and
decentralization; peace and security; trade and macroeconomic policy reforms; etc.)
Employ a ‘protection and empowerment’ framework to protect the most food insecure
groups and build the resilience of individuals and communities.
Address root causes and structural conditions within a given food insecure situation.
Adopt context-specific strategies with a focus on local-level implementation.
Extend analysis to capture the intrastate and interstate dimensions of food insecurity by
situating insecurity within multiple contexts (district, national, regional, global).
Conduct an in-depth analysis of targeted issues and populations from both a local and an
external perspective.
Focus on reducing risks and strengthening the resilience of individuals and communities
to withstand shocks.
Develop and monitor community-driven early warning systems.
Support building of local capacity, employ local resources and strengthen intra- and
inter-community dialogue to ensure ownership and sustainability, and to prevent
conflict over land issues.
Tap into opportunities for prevention that are grounded in local knowledge and
experience.
Conduct mapping at different time periods to identify trends and modify interventions,
if needed.
Identify excluded groups and neglected areas or populations.
45
III. Human Security Programme Phases in Situations of Food Insecurity
Phase 1: Analysis, Mapping and Planning
Human security programming is premised on the understanding that food insecurity cannot be
fully addressed without reducing broadly-framed risks and vulnerabilities as well as building on
the resilience of individuals and communities to absorb shocks and to adapt to the fluctuating
context of global food security. Key to identifying, mapping and addressing food-related security
threats is the inclusion of local perspectives from the affected groups and community(ies).
As in almost every human security programme, the following processes should be included in the
analysis, mapping and planning phase:

Identify the most critical and pervasive threats, vulnerabilities and insecurities of the
affected community(ies), their relation to other communities and to the larger context. The
participatory need/vulnerability and capacity analysis described in Chapter 2 should be used in
developing this phase.

Given that the food insecure are not a homogeneous group – identify, map and cluster
vulnerabilities and insecurities as per different groups: e.g. urban/rural, female-headed
households, refugees, IDPs, children and marginalized populations.

Assess the local capacities and resources of the affected community(ies) including those
capacities/resources that were used in past situations to address similar insecurities and detect
untapped opportunities that can be capitalized in order to develop localized and sustainable
solutions.

Map the interrelationship between coping mechanisms at the local level with policies at the
regional and international levels.

Address the gaps in the existing protection and empowerment measures.

Assess the actors and sectors involved: What are their roles? What are their activities? How
do they relate to one another? How can coherence be developed between them?
Analysis of threats, needs/ vulnerabilities and local capacities
The following table outlines the possible interrelations between (i) threats to food security and
their impact on other sectors, (ii) vulnerabilities at different levels, and (iii) the local capacities
available to respond to these challenges.
Table II: Food Security Threats, Needs/vulnerability and Capacity Matrix
Examples of Needs/Vulnerabilities
Examples of
Threats to Food
Security
Economic
Local
(community/individual)
- Reduced import capacity
National
- Collapse of
International
Capacities
(community/
individual level)
- Financial crisis,
- Self-sufficiency
46
- International
and/or domestic
financial crisis
- Changes in
consumption
patterns
- Rising oil prices
- Constraints on
national budgets
that decrease
expenditures on
agriculture and
socio-economic
programmes
- Dependence o
imports (primary
commodities)
- Unemployment
- Rising food and
input prices
Health
- Poor water and
sanitation
- Negative effects
of trade and aid
policies related to
health
- Negative effects
of global health
policies
Environmental
- Landslides,
rainfall, high
winds, pest
attacks, livestock
diseases
- Deforestation,
declining soil
fertility
- Extreme weather
events:
earthquakes,
floods, droughts,
desertification
- Global climate
changes
- Instability in production
incentives
- Reduced real income,
wealth, and purchasing
power
- Lack of availability and
access to social, health
and education
expenditures
- Decreased personal food
production
- Reduced asset holdings
- Reduced access to
entitlements
- Increased indebtedness
- Unemployment
economic growth
- Fiscal or
monetary crisis
- Constraints on
national budget
(SAPs, PSRPs,
etc.) which
decrease
expenditures on
agriculture and
socio-economic
programmes
- Dependence on
imports (primary
commodities)
trade related
shocks
- Rising food prices
- Negative effects
of trade and aid
policies
- Rising oil prices
- Rising demand
for bio fuel
(agriculture)
- Community
networks/
cooperatives for
markets/trade
- Financial
reserves/
Remittances
- Public finance
- Human capital
- Diversified
agriculture and
economy
- Lower food production
- Loss of working days
(reduced income)
- Increased non-food
expenditures (e.g. higher
health costs)
- Reduced uptake of
macro- and micronutrients
- Increased
exposure/reduced
immunity to disease
- Lack of access to
healthcare leading to less
treatment
- Reduced asset holdings
(selling off)
- Increased indebtedness
- Poor food utilization
- Falling productivity of
cropland
- Increased income
variability
- Increased pressure on
resources for livelihood
adaptation
- Increase in water-borne
diseases
- Lower food production
- Reduced livestock
holdings
- Reduced real income
(agricultural, non-farm)
and purchasing power
- Increased pressure on
natural resources
- Increased production
- Overburdened
healthcare systems
- Lack of social
safety nets/social
protection
programmes
- Lack of technical
expertise or
resources for
healthcare
- Epidemics,
HIV/AIDS, poor
water and
sanitation
- Illness, disability,
injury
- Epidemics,
HIV/AIDS, poor
water
- Negative effects
of trade and aid
policies related to
health
- Negative effects
of global health
policies
- Universal basic
education and
knowledge on
health related
matters
- Indigenous/
traditional health
practices
- Access to
information and
communitybased knowledge
creation such as
communitybased healthcare
and insurance
schemes
- Insufficient
response
mechanisms for
natural hazards
- Mismanagement
of natural resources
- Resource
depletion; demand
for alternatives;
heavy-reliance on
petroleum
- Natural
resource capital
- Natural
environmental
recovery
processes (e.g.
forests
recovering from
fires)
- Biodiversity
- Indigenous/
traditional
practices that
respect the
environment
- Coping
mechanisms
- Adaptive
47
Community
- Loss of
traditional
community-based
coping
mechanisms and
support systems
- Discriminatory
access to common
resources
Political
- Insufficient
political will
- Declining
investment in
agriculture,
particularly smallholder practices
- Non-egalitarian
policies for
distribution of
land and food
- Ad hoc market
interventions
costs
- Seasonal/migratory
nature of agriculture
- Reduced access to clean
drinking water
- Reduced income and
diversification
opportunities
- Exclusion from informal
insurance schemes
- Discriminatory access to
food by certain household
members (e.g. women and
children)
- Transfer of
malnourishment to
children (long-term
community effects)
- Inequitable intrahousehold food
distribution
- Breakdown in
agricultural support
systems
- Breakdown of social
protection systems
- Lower food production
- Increased transaction
costs
- Exacerbated inequalities
(e.g. access to land,
access by female headed
households)
- Lack of representation
and voice
- Food-related civil
disturbances
- Lack of formal
structures (unions,
collectives, women’s
organizations) for
political participation and
representation
strategies
- Memory of past
disasters
- Discrimination of
access to common
resources
- Social exclusion
- Loss of patronage
- Increase in
globalization and
lack of recognition
of community
specificity
- Social capital
- Coping
mechanisms
- Adaptive
strategies
- Memory of past
disasters
- Local nongovernmental
organizations or
traditional
organisms
- Non-egalitarian
policies for
distribution of land
and food
- Ad hoc market
interventions
- Corruption (e.g.
concentration in
value chain,
reliance on
intermediaries
- Civil unrest,
conflict
- Insufficient
financial
commitments
(pledges do not
meet demand)
- Uncoordinated
action by the
international
community
- Social capital
- Local nongovernmental
organizations or
traditional
organisms
- Good
governance
- Ethical
standards
- Local
leadership
- Accountability
mechanisms
Characteristics of threats for situations of food insecurity
Research in the area of food insecurity has highlighted the variegated nature of threats to food
security. These can be categorized by the following factors: type, level, frequency, timing and
severity. Depending on the particular combination of the factors and the types of protective
mechanisms and entitlement programmes in place, threats can impact communities in vastly
different ways. For example, research has identified that threats related to natural, environmental,
health and social conditions are among the key threats affecting communities when faced by
situations of food insecurity (Lovendal and Knowles, 2006). Therefore, from a human security
48
perspective, a thorough analysis of the range and the interplay of factors and the type of threats is
critical for identifying the best points of entry for maximum positive impact.
Table III: Characteristics of Threats to Food Security
Characteristic of
Threats
Type
Level
Frequency
Description
Political, social, economic, health, natural, and environmental.
Individual/household, community/regional, national, and/or global/regional.
Transitory risks: unpredictable events, cyclical/seasonal.
Trends: changes in variables over time.
Structural risks: long-term conditions rooted in the social, economic and/or political fabric.
Single event or coupled with other events/factors.
Timing
Strength, intensity, duration of the event and/or impacts.
Severity
(Compiled from Lovendal and Knowles, 2006)
Given the multi-level nature of the potential threats to food security, at the programme level, the
human security approach targets the affected community(ies). However, examining the broader
international response is also critical to ensuring complementarity and to identifying potential gaps
within situations of food insecurity.
Table IV: Examples of Strategies Needed for Addressing Situations of Food Insecurity
Human security
components
Economic
security







International strategies to enhance
protection and empowerment
Increase investment in development
assistance for broad based, sustainable
agricultural and rural growth in
developing countries
Better-targeted food aid, minimizing
potential negative externalities
Enhance food supply to the most
vulnerable
Seed/input relief
Restock livestock capital
Enable market revival and investing in
rural markets
Enhance income and other entitlements
to food
Health security
 Reform health, pharmaceutical and trade
policies that inhibit growth in
developing countries
 When appropriate, address health and
food aid/policies in tandem to ensure a
mutually reinforcing relationship
Environmental
security
 Affirm or re-affirm international
commitments to resource rehabilitation,
conservation, and alternative energy
National strategies to enhance protection
and empowerment
 Promote broad based, sustainable
agricultural and rural growth
 Revive rural financial systems
 Improve rural food production especially by
small-scale farmers
 Strengthen the labor market
 Diversify agriculture and employment
 Promote access to assets and services such
as land, water, seeds, fertilizers, technology,
infrastructure and energy.
 Revive access to credit system and savings
mechanisms
 Careful adoption of trade measures: focus
on protecting smallholder producers,
strategic sectors and emerging enterprises;
avoid last resort measures such as export
bans that could accentuate such crisis and
undermine long-term development
 Maintain or increase public expenditures on
health infrastructure and access
 Develop and safeguard programmes to
ensure safe food
 Establish nutrition intervention programmes
 Improve access to proper sanitation and
clean water
 Targeted policies on resource rehabilitation
and conservation
 Revitalize livestock sector
49
Community
security
Political
security
sources
 Meet targets and obligations on
environmental conservation as agreed
upon in multilateral treaties and
protocols
 Promote comprehensive, people-centred
solutions that are based on top-down
and bottom-up strategies
 Address unfair trade practices that can
limit the growth potential of
communities dependent on agriculture
 Address the structural causes of food
insecurity
 Reform agriculture and trade policies
that inhibit growth in developing
countries (e.g. dumping)
 Minimize vulnerability of developing
countries to the negative effects of rapid
liberalization and the reduction of the
public sector through trade negotiations
and agreements
 Recognize the interlinkages between
food security, poverty, peace/stability,
and economic growth
 Ensure food security objectives are
incorporated into national poverty
reduction strategies (PRSPs)
 Monitor food security and vulnerability
 Monitor immediate vulnerability and
intervention impact
 Develop risk analysis and management
 Implement transfer systems: Food/Cash
based
 Redistribute assets
 Consider assistance programmes that
encourage local communities to design
community-based food reserves
 Establish social rehabilitation programmes
 Reintegrate refugees and displaced people
 Address urban dimensions: unique factors
behind increasing urban poverty and
improving food security in terms of
availability and access, market
development, management of natural
resources and access to basic services
 Promote community participation on the
design, implementation and monitoring of
food and agricultural policies
 Deal with the structural causes of food
insecurity
 Increase public spending on agriculture and
support to smallholder farmers
 Re-establish rural institutions, invest in
rural infrastructure, and appropriately target
farming sector expenditures
 Re-establish social safety nets and invest in
social protection programmes as well as
community-based insurance schemes
 Enhance access to assets and land
 Address the entire rural space beyond
farming to include off farm income
opportunities
 Develop/enforce labor legislation and
employment programmes for rural workers
and seasonal workers
 Support the creation and strengthening of
producer’s organizations, women’s
organizations, etc.
Assessing multi-sectorality and externalities in situations of food insecurity
Given the highly volatile and complex interplay of factors necessary for ensuring food security,
interventions must take into account the potential for positive and negative externalities across
different sectors and levels. Undertaking such an assessment will allow the design of responses
and strategies to be comprehensive and flexible enough to respond to the changing conditions and
the inherent trade-offs in any situation of insecurity. Moreover, the examination of the interaction
between international and local dynamics can highlight the context-specificity of each scenario and
provide opportunities for targeted and sustainable solutions.
50
The “Protection and Empowerment” framework
At both the macro- and micro-levels, the issue of food insecurity must be tackled in a
comprehensive manner, based on a protection and empowerment approach that entails both topdown (i.e., address the structural problems involved in the food production and supply systems and
provide social safety nets and social protection mechanisms) and bottom-up measures (e.g.,
stimulate and support the agricultural sector particularly smallholder farmers as well as promote
community-based insurance schemes and interventions).
The added-value of the protection and empowerment framework is the association of these two
streams of decision-making in order to ensure complementarity and mutual benefits. In addition,
the framework forces consideration in view of short, medium, and long-term policies and
programmes.
 Protection
Protection against food insecurity requires action at multiple levels. Although national
governments have the primary responsibility to ensure food security for their citizens, the
responsibility for protection mechanisms also falls upon the international community. Often,
international policies have the consequence of restricting the policy space of national governments.
Therefore, the international community, donor agencies and national governments need to work in
close partnership in order to minimize the negative consequences of international policies related
to food security.
In addition, from a human security perspective, the notion of protective mechanisms needs to be
expanded to include measures that are designed to absorb some of the impact of internal and/or
external shocks so that the majority of the challenges faced are not shouldered by the most
vulnerable.

Short-term: Carefully targeted social safety nets and social protection programmes in
order to ensure universal access to food, with particular focus on the most vulnerable and
those suffering from chronic food insecurity.

Long-term: Focus on strengthening the agricultural sector in those developing countries
most in need and address the prevailing inequities in the international trade system.
 Empowerment
Empowerment strategies represent one of the cornerstones of the human security approach.
Therefore in addition to addressing gaps in the protective mechanisms, more emphasis needs to be
placed on designing and implementing long-term, sustainable, and bottom-up approaches. One of
the pillars of sustainable solutions for food security is the expansion of food production through
investing in rural development, especially of smallholder farms, and enlarging access to necessary
inputs such as seeds, fertilizers and land. Moreover, emphasis should also be placed on measures
that (i) strengthen the capacity of affected community(ies) to undertake risk reduction and develop
early warning systems so as to increase their ability to respond to, cope with, and recover from
food-related shocks; (ii) enhance resource management; (iii) increase participation in decision-
51
making regarding food security; and (iv) promote local and community-based insurance
mechanisms and schemes.
Phase 2: Implementation
Close partnership between different stakeholders is key to ensuring an integrated response to food
security. While some elements are confined to negotiations and policy-making at the international
level, other components require a focus at the local level by engaging relevant actors and
institutions from the different sectors noted below and as appropriate:
Table V: Examples of Relevant Actors Involved in Food Security
Public sector stakeholders
Local
National
-
International
-
Local government
Community-based organizations
(CBOs)
Female-headed households
National governments
Human rights councils
Hospitals
Military/Police
International organizations and
international financial
institutions (UN, World Bank,
WTO, IMF)
International donors
Civil society stakeholders
-
Community groups
Local NGOs
Women’s groups
-
-
Trade Unions
Farmers associations
Environmental groups
National civil society
Social movements and
advocacy groups
Schools and universities
International NGOs
International trade unions
International advocacy
groups
-
-
-
-
Private sector
stakeholders
Small farmers
Traders
Intermediaries
Corporations and
businesses
Banks and financial
institutions
Business associations
Agribusinesses
Multinational
corporations
The Stages of Participatory Implementation
Stage 1: Present the programme design to the affected community(ies)
 Create opportunities for feedback so as to ensure that the programme is relevant to the local
community.
 Allow space for local knowledge and build upon local experience and indigenous practices.
Stage 2: Establish a committee for overseeing the implementation
 Initiate cross-community dialogue to promote joint and collaborative management and use
of local resources for the programme.
 Be clear about the mandate of oversight committees and lines of reporting in order to
guarantee effective monitoring.
Stage 3: Allocate tasks and responsibilities
 Allocate tasks across different groups, including the most vulnerable, with a view to
provide opportunities for empowerment.
52
 Ensure inclusivity, particularly key community stakeholders and promote new learning
experiences.
Stage 4: Mobilize local resources
 Be sensitive to local practices, processes and structures, as well as local coping and
preventative mechanisms.
 Seek untapped resources within the community.
Stage 5: Establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism
 Acknowledge the dynamic nature of food insecurity and incorporate monitoring and
reporting mechanisms throughout different phases to allow for flexibility and adaptation as
appropriate.
 Ensure complementarity and consistency with existing community-based mechanisms to
avoid duplication and overlap.
Phase 3: Human Security Impact Assessment (HSIA)
An integral component of the human security framework, impact assessment must be employed
early on in any food security programme. In particular, since situations of food insecurity are
highly vulnerable to a wide variety of internal/external factors and are impacted by changes over
time, ongoing monitoring and evaluation of a given programme is imperative throughout the
planning, implementing and evaluation phases.
In situations of food insecurity, the HSIA tool introduces the following elements as inherent
components of evaluation and impact assessment:

Use of a wide range of both quantitative and qualitative indicators, including public
perceptions and community narratives based on inclusive, consultative, and interactive
bottom-up processes that take into account the views and experiences of the local groups
and the affected community(ies).

Comprehensive evaluation that integrates the seven different components of human
security and thereby allows due consideration to a wide range of variables that determine
the conditions for food security.

Measurement of programme impact at different levels and on a group-by-group basis. This
methodology has the potential to:
-
Show whether the programme has succeeded in reaching the intended beneficiaries.
Reveal whether additional groups have benefited as a result of the programme and
highlight ways to broaden coverage if some are excluded.
Provide crucial information on prevailing inequalities and marginalization and consider
ways to alter the situation.
Establish the level and nature of horizontal inequalities and social exclusion.
Identify groups who could be multipliers for social change and risk reduction.
53
-
Assess if and how the programme has been successful at empowering and/or protecting
different groups.

Sufficient flexibility to review and explain the context-specific expressions of insecurities
in any given food insecure scenario.

Assessment of positive and negative externalities on different groups (including crossborder entities) and different components of human security. Such a framework can help
highlight and evaluate the inter-linkages and the overlaps between the different responses,
therefore providing the basis for consideration of concrete ways in which different actors
can collaborate, coordinate and integrate their activities.

Assessment of intended and unintended consequences of international and national policies
on the structures and processes of food insecurity.

Linking programme outputs and outcomes (on the micro level) to changes and impacts
achieved at the macro level, including change in policies and societal structures.

A framework for providing recommendations, identifying best practices and highlighting
areas for improvement, as well as, for up-streaming key issues on food security related
matters.
54
Annex 1 - Genesis and the Institutional Trajectory of Human Security within
the UN Framework
Key Developments of Human Security at the UN
1992 Agenda for Peace
UN Secretary General Boutros-Boutros Ghali’s call for “an
integrated approach to human security” to address root causes of
conflict, spanning economic, social and political issues.
1994 Human Development
Report
Debut of human security, broadly defined as ‘freedom from fear
and freedom from want’ and marking the move from a statecentric to a human-centric security paradigm.
1999 Millennium
Declaration
United Nations Trust
Fund for Human
1999 Security (UNTFHS)
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan calls the international
community to work towards achieving the twin objectives of
‘freedom from fear’ and ‘freedom from want’.
In March 1999 the Government of Japan and the UN Secretariat
launch the UNTFHS to finance UN human security projects and
increase human security operational impact.
Human Security
Network (HSN)
Launch of the HSN at the initiative of Canada and Norway. The
HSN comprises a group of like-minded countries from all
regions of the world committed to identifying concrete areas for
collective action in the area of human security.
2001 Commission on Human
Security (CHS)
Establishment of the independent Commission on Human
Security under the chairmanship of Sadako Ogata and Amartya
Sen.
2003 Human Security Now
The CHS publishes its final report Human Security Now,
defining human security as: “to protect the vital core of all
human lives in ways that enhance human freedoms and human
fulfillment”.
2004 Human Security Unit
(HSU)
Establishment of the HSU at the UN Secretariat in the Office for
the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
2004 UN Secretary General’s
High-level Panel on
Threats, Challenges
and Change
Recognition of the interconnectedness of a wide range of new
threats to human security (economic and social threats; interstate conflict and rivalry; internal violence, including civil war,
state collapse and genocide; nuclear, radiological, chemical and
biological weapons; terrorism; and transnational organized
crime) and the need for greater cooperation and partnerships to
address them.
55
2005 In Larger Freedom:
Towards Development,
Security and Human
Rights for All
Report of the UN Secretary General setting a series of policy
priorities and proposing a number of institutional reforms to
achieve the three goals of ‘freedom from want’, ‘freedom from
fear’ and ‘freedom to live in dignity’.
2005 2005 World Summit
Outcome Document
Heads of States and Governments refer to the concept of human
security. Paragraph 143 of the Document recognized that: “all
individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to
freedom from fear and freedom from want, with an equal
opportunity to enjoy their rights and fully develop their human
potential”.
2006 Friends of Human
Security (FHS)
The FHS, “a flexible and open-ended informal group of
supporters of human security” consisting mainly of
representatives from UN member states and international
organizations working at the UN headquarters in New York.,
holds its first of four meetings in NY under the chairmanship of
Japan.
2008 UN General Assembly:
Thematic Debate on
Human Security
Debate to reflect on the multidimensional scope of human
security and to further explore ways to follow up on its reference
in the World Summit Outcome Document.

In 1992, Boutros-Boutros Ghali’s Agenda for Peace makes the first explicit reference of human
security within the UN. In this report, the concept was used in relation to preventative
diplomacy, peacemaking, peacekeeping and post-conflict recovery. The report drew attention
to the broad scope of challenges in post-conflict settings and highlighted the need to address
root causes of conflict through a common international moral perception and a wide network of
actors under “an integrated approach to human security”.

In 1994, the UNDP Human Development Report was the seminal text to stress the need for
human security, broadly defining it as ‘freedom from fear’ and ‘freedom from want’. The 1994
HDR further characterized human security as “safety from chronic threats such as hunger,
disease, and repression as well as protection from sudden and harmful disruptions in the
patterns of daily life – whether in homes, in jobs or in communities” (UNDP, 1994:23).

In the late 1990s, human security was adopted by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as part of the
new UN mandate in the 1999 Millennium Declaration and his call at the 2000 UN Millennium
Summit, addressing the international community to work towards the advancement of the twin
objectives of ‘freedom from fear’ and ‘freedom from want’.

In 1999, the Government of Japan and the UN launched the United Nations Trust Fund for
Human Security (UNTFHS), taking a concrete step towards operationalizing the concept. The
UNTFHS has been primarily funded by the government of Japan with the governments of
Slovenia and Thailand joining the Fund since 2007. The UNTFHS funds projects relating to
56
key thematic human security areas, such as, post-conflict peacebulding, persistent and chronic
poverty, disaster risk reduction, human trafficking and food security. Projects are selected with
a view to further “translate the concept of human security into operational activities that
provide concrete and sustainable benefits to peoples and communities threatened in their
survival, livelihood and dignity.”

Meanwhile, in 1999, a number of additional governments joined efforts to engage with the
concept as part of the Human Security Network (HSN). Launched by Canada, the Network
comprises a total of twelve ‘like-minded’ countries - Austria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica,
Greece, Ireland, Jordan, Mali, Norway, Switzerland, Slovenia, Thailand and South Africa as an
observer. Committed to applying the human security perspective to international problems, the
Network’s efforts include steps towards the application of human security, including the
Ottawa Convention on Anti-personnel Landmines and the establishment of the International
Criminal Court (ICC).

In 2000, in contribution to the above efforts and in direct response to the Secretary-General’s
call at the Millennium Summit, the independent Commission on Human Security (CHS) was
established under the chairmanship of Sadako Ogata, former UN High Commissioner for
Refugees, and Amartya Sen, Nobel Economics Prize Laureate (1998). Aiming to mobilize
support and provide a concrete framework for the operationalization of human security, in
2003, the CHS produced its final report Human Security Now. The report offers a working
definition of human security and reaches a number of respective policy conclusions covering
issues such as violent conflict, small arms, refugees and internally displaced persons, postconflict recovery, health, poverty, trade and education.

Following the conclusion of the activities of the CHS and as per its recommendations, the
Advisory Board on Human Security (ABHS) was created as an advisory body to the Secretary
General and to follow-up the policy recommendations of the CHS. In specific, the ABHS has
undertaken the role to (i) advise the UN Secretary-General on issues relating to the
management of the UNTFHS, (ii) further promote the human security concept and (iii)
increase the impact of human security projects funded by the Trust Fund.

The ABHS has been instrumental in the establishment, in 2004, of the Human Security Unit
(HSU) at the UN Secretariat in the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
(OCHA). The overall objective of the Unit is twofold: (i) management of the UNTFHS and (ii)
the development of the Trust Fund into a major vehicle for the acceptance and advancement of
human security within and outside the UN. Since its establishment in 1999, the UNTFHS has
funded more than 175 projects in approximately 70 countries.
Broader Acceptance of Human Security

Further to the establishment of the HSU, in 2004, the UN Secretary General’s High-level Panel
on Threats, Challenges and Change has significantly reinforced the utility and relevance of
human security. The report makes extensive use of the concept within a broader agenda of
requisite institutional reforms to respond to the new threats of the 21st century. In
acknowledging the broadened nature and interrelatedness of security challenges, it stresses the
57
need to address human security along with state security and draws strong links between
development and conflict.

In 2005, in his final proposal for UN reforms within his report In Larger Freedom, Kofi Annan,
albeit not making specific reference to the term human security, uses its three components,
namely ‘freedom from fear’, ‘freedom from want’ and ‘freedom to live in dignity’ as the main
thematic principles of the report.

More recently, the adoption of the Outcome of the 2005 World Summit by the General
Assembly has been pivotal in further raising awareness and interest in the concept of human
security. Paragraph 143 of the Outcome Document (A/RES/60/1) recognizes that “all
individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom
from want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy their rights and fully develop their human
potential”.

In parallel, the creation of the Friends of Human Security (FHS), as “a flexible and open-ended
informal group of supporters of human security”6 shows a commitment by states and
international organizations to engage with the concept in line with the CHS definition and
disseminate it on the ground. So far, the FHS has held four meetings (October 2006, April
2007, November 2007 and May 2008) discussing human security in relation to issues such as:
climate change, peacebuilding, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the global food
crisis, human rights education and gender-based violence. The fourth FHS meeting has been
followed by two additional events of significant contribution to the propagation of human
security: (i) the General Assembly Informal Thematic Debate on Human Security organized by
the President of the GA on 22 May 2008 in New York and (ii) the HSN Ministerial meeting
chaired by the Government of Greece in Athens on 29-30 May 2008.

Similarly as outlined in the follow-up document7, a multitude of UN agencies and departments
have implemented more than 175 human security projects worldwide. These projects cover a
wide range of issues including: protection and reintegration of refugees, post-conflict
peacebuilding, prevention of human trafficking, women’s empowerment, food and health
security, socio-economic security for vulnerable communities as well as activities to further
promote the concept of human security.

Developments at the international level are similarly reflected in the agendas and policy
debates among regional organizations such as the African Union, the European Union, the
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Organization of American States
(OAS) and the League of Arab States (LAS), where contemporary challenges – from hunger,
poverty and failing schools to armed conflict, human trafficking and international terrorism –
highlight the need for comprehensive, integrated and people-centered solutions.
6
The FHS consists mainly of representatives from UN Member States and international organizations working at the UN
headquarters in New York.
7
The February 25, 2008 report to the General Assembly includes a comprehensive outline of human security activities by Member
States of the FHS and UN funds, agencies and programmes.
58
Annex 2 – Sample of Projects funded by the UNTFHS
2.1 DR Congo:
Community Empowerment and Peacebuilding in Ituri8
Overview
Despite its rich endowments in natural resources and the resilience and entrepreneurship of its
population, DRC entered the 1990s in a state of quasi-collapse. The decade was marked by
successive episodes of increasing violence, internal, and cross-border conflicts resulting in
millions of casualties, considerable population movements, significant infrastructure destruction
and continuous deterioration of socio-economic conditions.
With growing stability returning to parts of the DRC, including the district of Ituri, the transition
from emergency to development assistance is increasingly recognized as pivotal to the future of
the district and the country. Meanwhile, human security, with its emphasis on “protecting people
from critical and pervasive threats and empowering them to build on their strengths and
aspirations” is seen by many as best suited to bridge the gap between emergency assistance and
medium to long-term development. By strengthening public safety; improving health, education
and economic recovery; and advancing reconciliation and coexistence, the human security
approach is argued to produce the peace dividend needed to bolster confidence in Ituri’s
continuing efforts to consolidate peace and transition to sustainable development.
Application of the human security approach
The fundamental aim of the project is to empower the peoples of Ituri to act on their own behalf
and re-establish their livelihoods in a culture of peace. As such, the project seeks to address the
human security needs of the targeted communities in the areas of public safety, coexistence and
reconciliation, health, education, training, employment and institutional support. Accordingly, the
8
This project was formulated prior to recent events in the eastern DRC and as of 7 November 2008 has not been
suspended.
59
project focuses on multi-sectoral entry points under an integrated inter-agency approach executed
by UNDP, FAO, UNICEF and UNHCR, in collaboration with WFP, MONUC, UNFPA and WHO
as well as community based organizations, national and international NGOs, and the provincial
government of Ituri.
Programming Areas
Based on an integrated and comprehensive approach, the project focuses on achieving the
following goals:
(1) Restore livelihoods and re-activate productive assets.
(2) Improve the delivery of and access to basic social services such as health, education and
water.
(3) Support community empowerment processes through good governance and promote a culture
of peaceful co-existence between diverse groups.
Activities under the project fall into two categories or pillars. The first pillar aims to empower
individuals, communities, and the government. As Human Security Now notes, empowerment
enables people to develop their potential and become full participants in the decision-making
process. The second pillar seeks to protect people and shield them from dangers through efforts to
develop norms, processes and institutions that systematically address insecurities.
Pillar One - Empowerment
In its objective to empower the people of Ituri and build their individual strengths and aspirations,
the project:




provides capacity building support to community-based cooperatives and association of
farmers, fishermen and livestock breeders in the most war affected and the poorest regions of
Ituri;
improves the quality of agricultural and veterinary extension services where over 85% of the
population of Ituri is engaged in;
strengthens capacities for sustainable employment opportunities to the benefit of vulnerable
youths including young girls as well as returnees; and finally
enhances the capacity of government and community-based organizations in the areas of
education and healthcare service delivery both of which are critical to allowing people to fully
develop themselves
Pillar Two - Protection
Through a concentrated effort to develop norms, processes and institutions that systematically
address insecurities, the project aims to protect and shield people from critical and pervasive
threats. Subsequently, norms of peaceful co-existence, safety and security are achieved through:
60


sporting, artistic, cultural, peace committees and workshop activities that promote social
cohesion and reconciliation; as well as,
reinforcement of police posts, the newly created border police, and the training of local line
ministries in conflict-sensitive planning and implementation skills
Summary
By integrating the two pillars of empowerment and protection and promoting responses that are
people-centred, comprehensive, and sustainable, the project addresses the full range of insecurities
faced by the peoples of Ituri and proposes activities that help strengthen the transition from
emergency to medium and long-term development, peace and security.
61
2.2 El Salvador:
Strengthening Human Security by Fostering Peaceful
Coexistence and Improving Citizen Security
Overview
In 1992 the government of El Salvador and the rebel Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front
(FMLN) signed the Chapultepec Peace Accord, ushering an end to over a decade of violent
conflict. However, as efforts to consolidate hard-won stability and democratic governance
continue to be undermined, the human security dividends of the peace process have yet to
materialize. In the western Department of Sonsonate, persistent violent crime, high homicide rates,
the presence of youth gangs, drug trafficking and a ready supply of firearms sustain a culture of
fear and intimidation.
Application of the human security approach
Lessons learned from past activities suggest that an integrated approach including multiple sectors,
various government agencies, and civil society participation are imperative to effectively improve
the human security of the region. Meanwhile, given the seriousness of domestic and sexual
violence, gender equality also requires special consideration as human security cannot be achieved
without the active participation of women.
With its emphasis on the special needs of vulnerable communities and its attention to advancing
inter-organizational partnerships, the human security approach is viewed as the most suitable
mechanism for fostering coexistence and civic security in the Department of Sonsonate. By
working comprehensively to (i) develop strong public institutions and civil society engagement,
(ii) advance the protection of children and adolescents, (iii) promote the prevention of armed
violence, (iv) provide responses to domestic and sexual violence, and (v) address gender gaps in
employment opportunities, the improvement of human security provides the foundation for
achieving sustainable development, peace and security in a region eager to benefit from the peace
process.
62
Programming Areas
Through both top-down protection and bottom-up empowerment measures, the project
comprehensively addresses the demands of human security in the Department of Sonsonate.
Taking into account the multi-sectoral nature of the human security challenges in the region, the
project takes an inter-agency approach to integrate the comparative advantages of four UN
agencies – UNDP, UNICEF, WHO and ILO. Project activities are implemented in direct
collaboration with the Government, including the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Education and
Health, the National Council on Public Security, the police and the judiciary. Local governments,
NGOs and community organizations are also involved in the implementation of the project. The
following are some of the key areas of intervention under the project.
(1) Coordinating and complementing initiatives by public institutions and civil society to prevent
violence and foster peaceful coexistence by training members of local police and relevant
administrative and judicial offices on effective and adequate policymaking as well as
promoting public awareness on civic culture and coexistence norms.
(2) Enhancing the safety of public space usage by building and reclaiming public spaces such as
parks and sports grounds, developing mechanisms and activities for sustainable municipal
management of public spaces with community participation, facilitating the integration of
children and adolescents in community spaces and vocational trainings, and promoting
strategies that increase public awareness and inhibit violations of children’s rights.
(3) Establishing mechanism to reduce road accident mortality and morbidity by facilitating the
adoption of local by-laws restricting arms-bearing in public spaces through campaigns and
media, developing arms control plans including the procurement of weapon detectors, and
creating strategies and networks on road education and prevention of road injuries and
accidents.
(4) Equipping local institutions to ensure comprehensive responses to domestic and sexual
violence by setting up self-help groups and inter-sectoral networks to address sexual and
domestic violence, carrying out awareness-raising campaigns, and supporting community
debates on domestic violence, sexual exploitation and human trafficking.
(5) Reducing gender gaps in access to employment and representation in decision-making
processes by providing technical assistance for the formulation and adaptation of gender
sensitive policies and promoting micro-projects to create employment opportunities and
economic incentives for women, with particular emphasis on young women and single
mothers.
Summary
The project aims to reduce the interconnected threats of violence, organized crimes, gender
inequality and social insecurity. With specific emphasis on protecting and empowering vulnerable
communities, the project contributes to the achievement of human security and stability in one of
the most violent and vulnerable regions in El Salvador.
63
2.3 Kosovo9:
Multi-sectoral Initiative for Community Stabilization
and Improved Human Security
Overview
The conflict of 1998/99 resulted in growing hardships on the already vulnerable and distressed
population of Kosovo. By further destroying the area’s social infrastructure and contributing to its
soaring unemployment, Kosovo today is one of the poorest regions in Europe. Moreover,
remaining social tensions between the deeply divided ethnic communities of Kosovo-Albanians,
Kosovo-Serbs and Roma Ashkali and Egyptian (RAE) minorities present further obstacles to
achieving human security in the region. By politicizing the provision of public services and
creating parallel facilities and structures, ethnic divisions have not only inhibited the reform and
development process but have also made the task of reintegrating over 200,000 internally
displaced ethnic minorities exceedingly complex and challenging.
Application of the human security approach
Focusing on the municipalities of North and South Mitrovice/a and Zvecan, current tensions
cannot be alleviated through piecemeal responses but instead require a comprehensive and
integrated approach that is based on human security. Subsequently, a broad range of
interconnected issues such as poverty, education, health, displacement, conflict prevention,
reconciliation, and the protection of minority rights must be addressed if sustainable peace and
stability is to take root in the region. To this end, the project draws upon the expertise of multiple
UN agencies (UNDP, UNV, WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA and OHCHR) and includes the full
partnership of the Ministry of Local Government, the Ministry of Communities and Returns, local
governments of North and South Mitrovice/a and Zvecan, as well as local NGOs and business
centers.
9
In accordance with Security Council Resolution 1244.
64
Programming Areas
To promote peace and stability in North and South Mitrovice/a and Zvecan, the project focuses on
the following three tangible outputs:
(1) Establish mechanisms for local authorities in the three target areas to involve all communities
in the planning, monitoring and assessment of service delivery.



Train local institutions on human rights and social protection, and integrate the human
rights approach into development strategies.
Develop and implement health sector action plans to rehabilitate local health facilities.
Refurbish schools and train educational officials and school teachers on inclusive teaching
methodologies.
(2) Increase enterprise activities within the three municipalities and develop stronger trade links
between the communities.


Identify economic opportunities for small and medium enterprises, establish short-term
employment opportunities in public investment schemes, promote skills upgrading and onthe-job training.
Train entrepreneurs on business management and planning practices and establish grant
mechanisms to support start-ups with a special focus on marginalized groups including
women, youth, and ethnic minorities.
(3) Improve inter-community relations through increased local ownership and strengthened
capacities of civil society organizations, as well as implementation of neighborhood and intercommunity development projects.

Empower communities through training of local NGOs and civil organizations on a variety
of issues ranging from participatory assessment techniques to intercommunity development
projects and dispute resolution mechanisms.
Summary
By bridging the ethnic divide through education and training as well as improving public services
and facilitating economic development, the project contributes to the consolidation of peace and
the promotion of human security in northern Kosovo.
65
2.4 Liberia:
Rebuilding Communities in Post-Conflict Liberia
Empowerment for Change
Overview
Emerging from a series of protracted conflicts, Liberia undergoes a challenging process of
recovery. Two decades of conflicts have destroyed the socio-economic infrastructure and have
forced people to flee from their home, leaving rural communities in dire poverty and
disillusionment. While return of the displaced and the demobilized ex-combatants signals
restoration of peace, severe shortage of food production and employment opportunities in rural
communities provide grounds for friction and discontent between returnees and those who, for one
reason or another, opted not to migrate and remained during the conflicts.
With increasing awareness of the risk of a relapse into conflict, consolidation of peace based on a
holistic approach is viewed as crucial in post conflict efforts. To this end, enhancing capacity of
rural communities to absorb returnees and to plan and manage long-term development is seen as
imperative in defusing the potential source for backslide. Human security, focusing on protecting
people from threats and empowering them to build on their strengths and aspirations, offers the
most suitable platform to support vulnerable communities recovering from conflict. Through
supporting participation in addressing their own needs, improvement of economic skills and
performance, and enhancement of basic social services in communities that are most affected by
conflicts in Liberia, the human security approach promotes successful transition from violent and
impoverished environment to sustainable peace and development.
Application of the human security approach
To enhance the empowerment and participation of the targeted communities in the decision
making process at the local level, the project adopts a multi-sectoral approach that addresses the
economic, social, institutional and capacity needs of the affected communities and rebuilds
relations among the host communities, the ex-combatants, the returnees and the IDPs.
Accordingly, the project takes an inter-agency approach that benefits from the comparative
66
advantages of UNDP, FAO and the WFP, and collaborates with non-governmental organizations
and local and national authorities including District Development Committees (DDC), Ministry of
Agriculture, Ministry of Rural Development, and the Results Focused Transitional Framework
(RFTF).
Programming Areas
Addressing a wide range of human security needs, the project focuses on the following objectives
and activities to:
(1) Enable targeted communities to participate in identifying and determining their needs;
articulating and negotiating with partners; and participating in the monitoring and realization
of such needs:



Facilitate the participation of community members in the formulation and the
administration of community rehabilitation projects;
Develop management skills of community members for effective and efficient assets
storage, local marketing and information processing; and
Support the establishment of systems and institutions such as credit schemes to improve the
development and marketing of agricultural products.
(2) Replenish farming skills and technical support services lost during the conflict in the targeted
communities:


Enhance blacksmith skills through delivery of training programs and rehabilitation of
blacksmith centres; and
Improve farming techniques such as crop production and the use of fertilizers.
(3) Support the revitalization of local economies by creating on-farm and off-farm opportunities
for gainful employment:


Rehabilitate basic infrastructure such as roads, bridges and canals through local contractors
with visible multiplier effects; and
Distribute seeds and other related farming inputs.
(4) Enhance access to basic social services including education, health and water and sanitation:

Rehabilitate schools, clinics, and water and sanitation facilities through local contractors.
Summary
Through a community-based multi-sectoral approach, the project enhances the capacity of postconflict rural communities to protect themselves from the risks of relapsing into conflict and
empowers them to consolidate and sustain the recovery towards peace and development.
67
2.5 Moldova:
Protection and Empowerment of Victims of Human
Trafficking and Domestic Violence
Overview
Continuous political conflicts and extreme poverty in Moldova have resulted in high
unemployment rates and a growing income disparity between urban and rural areas. Subsequently,
up to 40% of the labor force in some of the poorest towns and villages have emigrated abroad,
tearing apart family structures in rural towns and villages and undermining community support
mechanisms.
Of these, women and children bear the heaviest burden of the country’s challenges. Prompted by
their desperate economic and social situation, young women constitute the vast majority of
trafficked persons – migrating to improve the quality of their lives and yet often trafficked into
sexual exploitation. Meanwhile, children of poor and emigrating families are frequently abandoned
at state institutions, exposing them to further psychological stress and neglect.
Application of the human security approach
Looking at the root causes of human trafficking, human security highlights the inter-connections
between gender-based violence, poverty and sexual exploitation. Accordingly human security
advocates for not only physical security but also access to fundamental freedoms, economic
security, and social well-being. Through an integrated top-down protection and bottom-up
empowerment framework, human security promotes a comprehensive program that improves the
protective and socio-economic situation of women and children in rural town and villages in
Moldova.
68
Programming Areas
The project, in close collaboration with UNDP, UNFPA, IOM, and OSCE, and through
implementation by the government and local counterparts, comprises of the following two primary
components:
Protection
The objective of the Protection component is to strengthen the capacity of government institutions
in partnership with civil society to provide quality identification, protection, and assistance
services to victims of human trafficking and domestic violence on a sustainable basis. Protection
measures will be achieved through the following activities:



Build the capacity of institutions, professional groups and civil society on the prevention,
identification and provision of integrated support services to victims of human trafficking and
domestic violence;
Establish repatriation funds and mechanisms to offer immediate safe accommodation, medical
care and psychological counseling services; and
Raise social awareness on the issue of domestic violence and human trafficking through selfhelp groups, education and counseling services.
Empowerment
The objective of the Empowerment component is to empower communities, civil society
organizations, and individuals to better address the issues of human trafficking and domestic
violence and to provide basic services for at-risk persons. Empowerment measures will be
achieved through the following activities:


Mobilize target communities to dispatch community-led development processes and
community initiatives addressing domestic violence and human trafficking through community
meetings and action groups;
Train community leaders, individuals and local media on human security issues including
access to alternative livelihoods, social responsibility and positive parenting practices.
Summary
By addressing the human security needs of vulnerable women and children in Moldova, the project
bridges the existing gap between gender-based violence, poverty, and sexual exploitation. This
integrated approach comprehensively addresses the root causes of human trafficking and
empowers communities to provide better protection assistance and empowerment measures to
sustain lives that are free from fear, want and loss of dignity.
69
2.6 Myanmar:
Support to Ex-Poppy Farmers and Poor Vulnerable
Families in Border Areas
Overview
Myanmar, a country of 53 million inhabitants, is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in
South East Asia consisting of over 135 diverse groups. Since independence these groups have been
vying for various levels of autonomy. In an effort to maintain the cease-fire status quo and to avoid
the renewal of conflict, the Government has adopted a ‘peace for development strategy’ and in
1999 agreed to a 15-year plan to eradicate poppy production form Myanmar.
For generations poppy production however has been the main source of income for large segments
of inhabitants in the highlands of Shan State. And while recent efforts on opium eradication have
produced considerable progress nevertheless in the absence of alternative income opportunities,
the eradication plan has resulted in sharp declines in incomes and a significant rise in levels of
indebtedness among farmers. Without alternative sources of income, as well as households
struggling to meet their basic needs, farmers are more likely to resist authorities, resulting in
tensions and a possible renewal of conflicts along the border areas of Myanmar including the Shan
State.
Application of the human security approach
Faced with loss of income, inadequate food security, lack of education and multiple health
challenges, the project addresses the broad range of human security challenges confronted by the
targeted communities and highlights the socio-economic alternatives needed to ensure adequate
food and economic security during the transition period. To this end, WFP, FAO, UNODC and
UNFPA will implement an interagency approach, in direct partnership with a number of local and
70
international NGOs, focusing on the requisite health, education, nutrition, infrastructure, and
capacity building needs of the local communities.
Programming Areas
With the goal of improving the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable communities in the Shan
State, the project focuses on the following objectives and activities:
(1) Protect ex-poppy farming households and poor vulnerable families from critical loss of
livelihoods and improve their food security:



Identify sustainable alternative crops and provide seeds and fertilizers together with
technical support and training to transfer modern agricultural technologies as well as
land/water management skills;
Construct weirs and dams and develop canals to improve irrigation system; and
Recommend alternative livelihoods and provide training for income generating skills.
(2) Create and maintain conducive conditions for the rehabilitation and restoration of self
reliance:





Construct and renovate primary schools;
Improve water supply facilities based on the needs of the community;
Conduct vocational training on masonry and carpentry, and provide the necessary tools and
equipments;
Enhance access to primary education, targeting women and adolescent girls; and
Increase awareness and knowledge on HIV/AIDS, health and gender issues.
Summary
With multiple entry points, the project comprehensively addresses the sources of insecurities faced
by the ex-poppy farming communities as they transition away from poppy production. Based on
capacity building activities, conditions for the eradication of opium are sustained and access to
alternative livelihoods for the community is ensured. Moreover, by protecting and empowering
people exposed to extreme poverty and sudden economic downturns, the project through the
human security approach provides a powerful tool in assisting communities in freeing themselves
form dependency on poppy production and restoring their livelihoods.
71
2.7 Peru:
Natural Disasters in Peru: From Damage Limitation to
Risk Management and Prevention
Overview
Located at the foot of the Andes and in one of Peru’s most remote and vulnerable regions, the
communities of Quispicanchis and Carabaya face a daunting range of natural disasters including
earthquakes, floods, droughts, tsunamis and avalanches. Moreover, the recurrent nature of these
disasters has resulted in serious human insecurities that threaten to confine these communities into
permanent situations of poverty, malnutrition and ill-health.
Too often responses to natural disasters are piecemeal, reactive and fail to address the root causes
of vulnerabilities. Moreover, little attention is paid to the interlinkages between risk reduction,
capacity building and support for sustainable development. However, to substantially improve the
human security of the peoples of Quispicanchis and Carabaya, these factors must be considered.
Through disaster management education, safer building techniques, improved agricultural
practices as well as community-driven early warning and disaster response mechanisms,
communities can better prevent and mitigate the impacts of natural disasters. Similarly by
supporting community-based land conservation and improved agricultural practices, responses can
tap into vast and untapped opportunities that not only help restore natural defenses vis-à-vis
disasters but also benefit the poor by expanding their economic opportunities, improving their
livelihoods, and strengthening their resilience in times of crisis.
Application of the human security approach
Based on an integrated inter-agency approach, the project addresses a broad range of
interconnected issues that help protect and empower the most neglected and exposed communities
72
in the southern Andes region. Accordingly, the project benefits from the participation of UNDP,
UNICEF, FAO, WHO and WFP, and through direct collaboration with local and national
counterparts such as civil defense district committees (CDDCs), community networks, nongovernmental organizations and the offices of regional authorities including the Ministries of
Agriculture, Health, and Education as well as the National Programs for Food Assistance and for
River-basin Management and Soil Conservation.
Programming Areas
Taking into account the multi-sectoral demands of human security, the project focuses on the
following objectives and activities:
(1) Empower district municipalities in disaster preparedness, response, and coordination of the
Civil Defence District Committees:


Strengthen the monitoring and logistical capacities of municipal and district committees by
elaborating and enhancing disaster prevention tools, early warning systems and local
communications infrastructure; and
Promote community awareness and participation by identifying vulnerable persons and
clarifying safe areas and evacuation routes.
(2) Reduce the impact of natural disasters through risk mitigation and prepare for community
survival, health and food security:


Improve the health condition of local populations and expected mothers by developing
capacities of local health care institutions and constructing pilot homes with upgraded
cooking and sanitary facilities; and
Engage in reforestation activities, build micro-dams and protective barriers against floods
and improve soil conservation.
(3) Strengthen coping capacities to protect livelihoods, improve nutrition, meet basic needs and
expedite recovery in the event of a natural threat:



Develop livestock management and animal treatment techniques that are suitable for severe
weather conditions;
Improve subsistence agriculture through effective management of natural resources and
selection of suitable local systems for harvest, storage, distribution and trade of crops; and
Enhance nutrition and health conditions of local communities and vulnerable groups
through vegetable production in locally designed green houses and training on hygiene and
sanitary practices.
(4) Improve community awareness and knowledge of practical preventive measures in the event of
natural disasters:

Design and distribute communication strategies and tools that link disaster prevention with
the protection of environmental assets and disaster education.
73
(5) Disseminate lessons learned at the regional level and implement standing agreements between
regional, provincial, and district institutions to promote sustainability:


Promote inter-district communications to benefit from sharing of local best practices and
mentoring; and
Engage in information dissemination at the national level in collaboration with the press
and the private sector.
Summary
By addressing the full range of insecurities faced by the targeted communities, the project
promotes responses that are community-driven, preventive and sustainable. Through a culture of
local prevention and empowerment, the projects helps to further strengthen the preventive and
coping capacities of the communities of Quispicanchis and Carabaya as well as improve their
long-term growth and sustainable development.
74
Bibliography
ActionAid International. “Participatory Vulnerability Analysis: A Step by Step Guide for Field
Staff.” http://www.actionaid.org.uk/100262/participatory_vulnerability_analysis.html
Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP).
2003. “Participation by Crisis-Affected Populations in Humanitarian Action: A Handbook for
Practitioners.” Overseas Development Institute, London.
Alkire, Sabina. 2003. “A Conceptual Framework for Human Security”. CRISE Working Paper.
Centre for Research on Inequality, Peace and Human Security. Queen Elisabeth House, Oxford
University.
Barnett, Michael, et al. 2007. “Peacebuilding: What is in the Name?” Global Governance 13: 3558.
Brahimi, Lakhdar. 2007. “State Building in Crisis and Post-Conflict Countries”. 7th Global Forum
on Reinventing Government Building Trust in Government 26-29 June 2007, Vienna, Austria.
Boutros Boutros-Ghali. 1992. An Agenda for Peace: Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and
peace-keeping. Report of the Secretary-General of the United Nations pursuant to the statement
adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council on 31 January 1992.
CERI for Peace and Human Security (CPHS). 2007. “Human Security Training Materials.”
http://www.peacecenter.sciences-po.org
CERI Program for Peace and Human Security. 2007. “Integrating for Peace: A Reflection on the
Peacebuilding Commission’s Strategies for Integration”. Conference Report, 7 November
2007, Paris.
Collier, Paul and Hoeffler, Anke. 2004. “Aid, Policy and Growth in Post-Conflict Countries”.
European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1125-1145, October.
Collier, Paul and World Bank. 2003. Breaking the conflict trap: civil war and development policy.
Washington, DC, New York: World Bank; Oxford University Press.
Commission on Human Security. 2003. Human Security Now: Final Report, New York: CHS.
Cutillo, Alberto. 2006. “International Assistance to Countries Emerging from Conflict: A Review
of Fifteen Years of Interventions and the Future of Peacebuilding.” International Peace
Academy Policy Paper.
Doyle, Michael and Nicholas Sambanis. 2006. Making War and Building Peace: United Nations
Peace Operations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ellis, Frank. 2003. “Human Vulnerability and Food Insecurity: Policy Implications”. Forum for
Food Insecurity in Southern Africa, August 2003.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2008. “The State of Food
Insecurity in the World.”
Fischer, Martina. 2004. “Recovering from Violent Conflict: Regeneration and (Re-) Integration as
Elements of Peacebuilding”. Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management
Gasper, Des. 2004. “Securing Humanity – Situating the Human Security discourse” Paper for 4th
conference on the Capability Approach, University of Pavia, September 2004.
75
_______. 2007. “Human Rights, Human Needs, Human Development, Human Security:
Relationships between Four International ‘Human’ Discourses”, Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague GARNET Working Paper: No 20/07.
Glasius, Marlies. 2008. “Human Security: from Paradigm Shift to Operationalisation: Job
Description for a Human Security Worker”, Security Dialogue Vol. 39(1): 31–54.
High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. 2004. A More Secure World: Our Shared
Responsibility. Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change.
In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All. Report of the
Secretary General of the United Nations for decision by Heads of State and Government in
September 2005.
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. 2001. The Responsibility to
Protect. Report of the Commission. International Development Research Centre. Canada.
International Food Policy Research Institute. 2008. “Conflict, Food Insecurity and Globalization.”
FCND Discussion Paper 206.
Ivanic, Maros and Martin, Will. “Implications of Higher Global Food Prices for Poverty in LowIncomes Countries.” The World Bank Development Research Group Trade Team, Policy
Research Working Paper 4594, April, 2008.
Jolly, Richard. 2006. “UN Reform and Human Security: The Need for Broad Perspectives.”
Jolly, Richard and Basu Ray, Deepayan. 2006. “The Human Security Framework and National
Human Development Reports”. NHDR Occasional Paper 5, Human Development Report
Office of the UNDP.
Kuntjoro, Irene A. and Jamil, Sofiah. 2008. “FOOD SECURITY: Another Case for Human
Security in ASEAN”. A paper presented at NTS-Asia 2nd Annual Convention, Beijing, 10-11
November 2008.
Lovendal, Christian Romer and Knowles, Marco. 2005. “Tomorrow’s Hunger: A Framework for
Analysing Vulnerability to Food Insecurity”. ESA Working Paper No. 05-07.
McClain-Nhlapo, Charlotte. 2004. “Implementing a Human Rights Approach to Food Security”.
International Food Policy Research Institute, 2020 Africa Conference Brief 13.
Menkhaus, Ken. 2004. “Impact Assessment in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: Challenges and Future
Directions”. International Peacebuilding Alliance Report.
Nef, Jorge. 1999. Human Security and Mutual Vulnerability: The Global Political Economy of
Development and Underdevelopment, Second Edition, Ottawa: IDRC Books.
Nordås, Ragnhild and Gleditsch, Nils Petter. 2009. “IPCC and the climate-conflict nexus”. Paper
Presented to the 50th Convention of the International Studies Association, New York, 15-18
February 2009.
Oberleitner, Gerd. 2005. “Human Security: A Challenge to International Law?” Global
Governance 11 (2005), 185–203.
Oberleitner, Gerd. 2005. “Porcupines in Love: The Intricate Convergence of Human Rights and
Human Security”. European Human Rights Law Review, 2005.
76
Ogata, Sadako. 2002. “State Security – Human Security”. Brown University Ogden Lecture, 26
May, 2002.
OXFAM International. 2008. “Double-Edged Prices- Lessons from the food crisis: 10 Actions
Developing Countries Should Take”. OXFAM Briefing Paper, October 2008.
Paris, Roland. 2006. “Understanding the Coordination Problem in Post-War State Building”
Research Partnership on Post-War State-Building, July 2006.
Seidensticker, Ellen. 2002. “Human Security, Human Rights, and Human Development”. Paper
presented at the Harvard Kennedy School, 6 February 2002.
Sen, Amartya. 2000. “Why Human Security?” presentation at the International Symposium on
Human Security, Tokyo (July) pp. 1-11.
Shah, Mahendra. 2002. “Human Security and Food Security: The Role, Relevance, and
Responsibility of Science”. Keynote Speech at the Symposium, Vienna International Center
Tuesday, 3rd December 2002.
Shinoda, Hideaki. 2004. The Concept of Human Security: Historical and Theoretical Implications.
IPSHU English Research Report Series No.19 Conflict and Human Security: A Search for New
Approaches of Peace-building (2004).
Stewart, Frances. 2004. “Development and Security”. Conflict, Security & Development, Vol. 4,
Issue 3, December. pp. 261-288.
Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou, and Anuradha M. Chenoy. 2007. Human Security: Concepts and
implications. London: Routledge.
Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou. 2005. “Human Security: The Seven Challenges to Operationalizing the
Concept. Human Security: 60 minutes to Convince” Organized by UNESCO, Section of
SHS/FPH/PHS September 13, 2005-09-14 Paris, France.
Thomalla, Frank et al. 2006. “Reducing human vulnerability to climate-related hazards: Towards a
common approach between the climate change adaptation and the disaster risk reduction
communities”. Disasters Volume 30 Issue 1, Pages 39 – 48.
Track on “Human Security”. “Empowering People at Risk: Human Security Priorities for the 21st
Century”. Report of the Helsinki Process on Globalization and Democracy.
Tschirgi, Neclâ. 2004. “Post-Conflict Peacebuilding Revisited: Achievements, Limitations,
Challenges.” International Peace Academy. Prepared for the WSP International/IPA
Peacebuilding Forum Conference.
_______. 2003. “Peacebuilding as the Link Between Security and Development: Is the Window of
Opportunity Closing?” International Peace Academy.
UK Department for International Development. 2005. “Why We Need to Work More Effectively
in Fragile States”. DFID Publication 2005.
Ul Haq, Mahbub. 1995. Reflections on Human Development. New York: Oxford University Press.
United Nations. A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. Report of the High Level Panel
on Threats, Challenges and Change, 2004.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1994. Human Development Report 1994 – New
Dimensions of Human Security. New York: Oxford University Press. Chapter 2, pp. 22-40.
77
United Nations Secretary General’s High Level Task Force on the Global Food Crisis. 2008.
“Elements of a Comprehensive Framework of Action”. Draft for Informal Distribution at
Rome High Level Conference on Food Security, April 2008.
“What is ‘Human Security’? Comments by 21 Authors”, Security Dialogue, Vol. 35, No. 3,
September 2004, pp. 347-87.
Wisner, Ben, Piers Blaikie, Terry Cannon and Ian Davis. 2003. At Risk: Natural hazards, people’s
vulnerability and disasters (2nd Edition). http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7235.pdf
World Bank. 2006. “Community-Driven Development in the Context of Conflict-Affected
Countries: Challenges and Opportunities”. Report No. 36425 – GLB, June 20, 2006.
World Food Program. “Rising Food Prices: Impact on the Hungry.” WFP Media Backgrounder, 10
April, 2008.
World Health Organization. “WHO and the Global Food Security Crisis: The Health and Nutrition
Dimensions.” http://www.who.int/food_crisis/global_food_crisis/en/print.html
2005 World Summit Outcome. Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, 24
October 2005.
78
© Copyright 2009 United Nations
Reproduction of the publication without prior permission from the copyright holder is authorized
only for educational or other noncommercial purposes.
For more information, please contact
For more information, please contact:
Human Security Unit
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
United Nations
M-063937
380 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10017, USA
Phone: +1 (917) 367-0004
Fax: +1 (212) 963-1312
http://ochaonline.un.org/humansecurity
79